Related: Drones fly as red tape dives
AS AN amateur fleet of aerial offsiders is assembling across the state, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s red tape reduction for everyday operators will make it even quicker to take to the air.
But the boosted numbers are fast making some important questions critical as remotely piloted aircraft become commonplace.
Some question the lack of safety training in the new regulations. The federal government this week announced a review into the new drone rules. Groups including the Australian Federation of Air Pilots warned drone operators would proliferate and risk contact with commercial aircraft.
Partner at lawyers King Wood Mallesons, Renae Lattey, warn more legal wrangling will be wrought as drone use grows over time, particularly for privacy, intellectual property, data and liability for damages.
“Licensing of drone use is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the regulatory challenges posed by the proliferation of remote aircraft technology.
“Also, I expect there are a lot of insurance companies looking at public liability insurance policies for drone operators.”
She said landholders who contract drone operators on their property – an agronomist for example – should clarify who owns the data collected by the drone and who owns the output of analysis that may be produced from it.
Farmers should be alive to the fact a corporation may want to use information gleaned from the landscape by a drone – for supply chain operations, pesticides and farm chemicals and a range of other uses.
“Perhaps you don’t care (if a contractor) aggregates your data, but you do need to think about what they could use that data for,” Ms Lattey said.
