eskil23
Wikipedia Photographer
On October 24 2014 the Swedish Data Inspection Board (the regulatory authority for matters of personal privacy) published a statement that camera equiped drones are to be regarded as video surveillance equipment and permission must be sought at the County Administration to operate. Dashcams was pointed out as illegal for the same reason.
Nobody had off course applied for permission for operating aerial surveillance cameras. I would be surprised if anyone ever did, because who whould pay $400 just to get a rejection. Today I was surprised, because a local company did apply for permission at Scania County Administration. The application got rejected. The only vaild reasons to grant such permission is if the purpose of the surveillance is to aviod accidents or crime.
Nobody has yet been been prosecuted for operating video surveillance gear illegaly from a UAV. Until that happens, it is still uncertain if unmanned aerial photography is illegal in Sweden.
The key properties that defines surveillance cameras are:
1) It can be used for monitoring people
2) It can cover public spaces
3) It can be operated autonomously or remotly
This, and not airspace regulations, is the most important obstacle for UAV operations in Sweden.
There are three important doubts regarding this point of view:
1) Can the camera actually be used for monitoring people? Airspace safety regulations says that minimal safety distance to buildings, vehicles and people is 50 meters. Can people be distinguished or identified at that distance with the camera used? With a GoPro with a 170 degree field of view I don't think it is possible.
2) There is a exception on the law for cameras mounted on vehicles if the purpose is to improve the view of the operator (like a reversing camera) to improve safety and working environment.
3) The law does not define the distinction between remote operation and on-site operation. Practice is that a camera on a tripod can be remotly triggered as long as the photographer has both the camera and the subject photographed in sight.
Nobody had off course applied for permission for operating aerial surveillance cameras. I would be surprised if anyone ever did, because who whould pay $400 just to get a rejection. Today I was surprised, because a local company did apply for permission at Scania County Administration. The application got rejected. The only vaild reasons to grant such permission is if the purpose of the surveillance is to aviod accidents or crime.
Nobody has yet been been prosecuted for operating video surveillance gear illegaly from a UAV. Until that happens, it is still uncertain if unmanned aerial photography is illegal in Sweden.
The key properties that defines surveillance cameras are:
1) It can be used for monitoring people
2) It can cover public spaces
3) It can be operated autonomously or remotly
This, and not airspace regulations, is the most important obstacle for UAV operations in Sweden.
There are three important doubts regarding this point of view:
1) Can the camera actually be used for monitoring people? Airspace safety regulations says that minimal safety distance to buildings, vehicles and people is 50 meters. Can people be distinguished or identified at that distance with the camera used? With a GoPro with a 170 degree field of view I don't think it is possible.
2) There is a exception on the law for cameras mounted on vehicles if the purpose is to improve the view of the operator (like a reversing camera) to improve safety and working environment.
3) The law does not define the distinction between remote operation and on-site operation. Practice is that a camera on a tripod can be remotly triggered as long as the photographer has both the camera and the subject photographed in sight.
Last edited by a moderator: