UAVs also pose a number of other legal concerns which remain more of a challenge for
the industry and require greater clarity within regulation. Such concerns include liability, risk, privacy, nuisance, trespassing and data protection.
UAVs fitted with cameras are increasingly generating legal concerns over privacy and
data protection; an issue which is becoming complicated by hobbyist usage of UAVs.
Joseph Dalby has weighed in on this matter noting that, ‘clarity is required on what constitutes “commercial” operations, when it is not widely known or entirely certain that
posting to social media & YouTube is a commercial activity, not least because it does
not tie in with data protection laws. DPA provides an exemption for data captured “by
an individual only for purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs
(including recreational purposes)”. So it is an important issue to address as UAV’s give
hobbyists ability to capture personal data’.
Concerns associated with liability, risk and insurance are particularly complicated in regard to the UAV industry. Liability regulation is likely to incorporate UAV pilots’ duty
of care to pedestrians, property owners and other airspace users, however it remains
uncertain as to whether inexperienced users will be treated more or less harshly than
qualified pilots. The extent to which criminal law will play a role in liability cases for UAVs
is also still unclear; in recent months prosecution for improper UAV usage has begun to
increase however the process is still at an early stage of development. Joseph has provided insight into the possible future for the role of criminal law within the UAV industry,
commenting that ‘the obvious model to look at is motor offences: I can foresee offences
of “careless flying” “flying under the influence of alcohol or drugs” and possibly “flying
without a licence”…On the other hand, technological advances may shift the burden
on to the manufacturer, who will attempt to reduce the incidence of pilot error. It depends on the effectiveness of autonomous navigation technology’. Insurance is also set
to become a key element of UAV regulation. With specialised UAV insurance companies
already emerging, including Coverdrone and UAV Protect, the industry is likely to move
more in-line with motor regulation and enforce compulsory insurance for UAV pilots.
There have also been recent calls to enforce a higher threshold for safeguarding the public from UAVs in congested areas. Yet again, this issue presents a challenge to maintaining a UAV industry balanced between safe & efficient regulation whilst still enabling the
commercial sector to develop. Joseph has commented that whilst a higher threshold for
safeguarding the public is needed in some areas, this should not be at the expense of the
commercial industry, and the ‘commercial use of RPAS within congested areas should be
facilitated’. Instead, Joseph believes that greater responsibility should be placed upon
UAV operators, noting that ‘operators must be able to commit to certain higher standards, and then they will be given more latitude to carry out operations without needing
constant or CAA oversight for each operation. That means putting more responsibility
in the hands of the operators, and being held accountable for wrong doings. So that the
users self-regulate because of the threat of loss of licence, or punishment.
28