Last month the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) considered a proposed nationwide law change reflecting the impact of unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones.
A ULC committee considered the Tort Law Relating to Drones Act for adoption by state governments. The effort, which provoked controversy across varied levels and areas of law implicated by growing use of drones, attempts to clarify property and privacy rights amidst the rapid increase of drones operated by hobbyists, companies and government agencies.
The ULC committee drafting the Act maintained existing law on the relationship between property rights and airspace fails to protect both property owners and drone operators, officials said, noting aviation policy and law never comprehensively addressed how public aviation rights and individual property and privacy rights aligned at lower levels of airspace, essentially below 500 feet above the ground.
Drone companies, industry associations, and alliances have offered resistance to the proposal, claiming that it interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority to regulate the nation’s airspace and to pre-empt state and local regulations on drones. Opponents of the proposed law also state that it ignores existing tort law on aerial trespass developed with manned aircraft in mind is appropriate to apply to drones, and creates new rules on property and privacy rights that will spawn litigation and uncertainty for drone operators and inhibit innovation and development of commercial opportunities.
Proposal advocates referenced the draft act also has defenders who have argued that the act’s bright-line aerial trespass standard balances the interests of the nascent sector with the traditional rights of property owners to exclude unwanted intruders from their property.
Reginald Govan, the FAA’s former chief counsel, dismissed the notion the FAA’s rules had pre-empted state and local governments from regulating how drones affect property rights.