Drone Slayer Vindicated!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

Judge rules in favor of “Drone Slayer,” dismisses lawsuit filed by pilot

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought against William Merideth, the Kentucky man who shot down a drone that Merideth believed was flying over his own property in 2015. During the weeks that followed the incident, Merideth dubbed himself a "drone slayer." Later, he sold orange t-shirts with that phrase printed on them.

The ruling now means the lingering question as to whether American federal law recognizes the concept of aerial trespass will have to wait for another day.

Last year, drone pilot David Boggs sued Merideth in federal court in Louisville, asking the court to make a legal determination as to whether Boggs’ drone’s July 2015 flight constituted trespassing.

In the case, Boggs’ lawyers believed that because Merideth’s destruction of the drone was unwarranted, therefore Merideth should pay damages of $1,500 to repair or replace the drone.

In a Tuesday opinion, Senior US District Judge Thomas B. Russell ruled in favor of Merideth’s motion to dismiss, finding that federal court is not the proper venue for this claim.

Drone Slayer (Aah-aah-aah)
Fighter of the Pilot (Aah-aah-aah)
Champion of the shotgun (Aah-aah-aah)
You're a master of shooting
And friendship for everyone

If you are unsure read it in the style of this:

Spoiler:

**jreilly89**

Kentucky man

I think Florida man has a new rival

**Ouze**

TIL federal court is not the venue for the federal crime of shooting at aircraft.

**whembly**

Drones are considered aircrafts now? O.o I thought that was under consideration, but was never ruled... (google-fu'ing this)

**Lord of Deeds**

whembly wrote:
Drones are considered aircrafts now? O.o I thought that was under consideration, but was never ruled... (google-fu'ing this)

I would think yes since you have to register them like other aircraft with the FAA.

http://federaldroneregistration.com/?gclid=CjwKEAjwh9PGBRCfso2n3ODgvUcSJAAhpW5oSJ6nDsvj-UYGrZ_XzhyUVillW_7X1_WH2p4liLFRbRoC7B7w_wcB

**Peregrine**

whembly wrote:
Drones are considered aircrafts now? O.o I thought that was under consideration, but was never ruled... (google-fu'ing this)

Correct. The FAA considers them aircraft because the FAA wants control over them (and for good reasons). I suppose it's arguable that the federal court is not the place for the civil case involving the financial damages, but "drone slayer" has proudly admitted to committing a crime and should be sent to prison.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
TIL federal court is not the venue for the federal crime of shooting at aircraft.

To be fair, this is a civil case involving one party suing another for financial compensation, not a criminal case with the state prosecuting "drone slayer" for the crime of shooting at an aircraft.

**whembly**

Thanks for the clarification.

Now, I need to check my drones to see if they're over .55lbs...

**Breotan**

What about those drones Amazon is testing? If they are carrying a heavy package would that put them in violation where they otherwise might not be?

**Peregrine**

Breotan wrote:
What about those drones Amazon is testing? If they are carrying a heavy package would that put them in violation where they otherwise might not be?

FAA regulations normally use an aircraft's fully-loaded weight for defining this kind of thing, so they'd be in violation even if they're flying empty. From a practical point of view, it doesn't matter. Any drone capable of carrying a package is going to weigh more than half a pound.

**gnome_idea_what**

Breotan wrote:
What about those drones Amazon is testing? If they are carrying a heavy package would that put them in violation where they otherwise might not be?

Interesting. I wonder if the law will rule that any payload/package counts toward the weight or not.

**Peregrine**

gnome_idea_what wrote:
Interesting. I wonder if the law will rule that any payload/package counts toward the weight or not.

See above. It would, but it won't matter in any real case.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, note that the registration website linked earlier is a third-party service offering information and an option to register the drone with the FAA for you. It is NOT the official FAA registration process.

**Ouze**

Peregrine wrote:
Also, note that the registration website linked earlier is a third-party service offering information and an option to register the drone with the FAA for you. It is NOT the official FAA registration process.

Those have caught quite a few people, sadly.

The actual URL is https://registermyuas.faa.gov/