The Government has demonstrated that they don't seem to care too much about drones in the air, as we've seen all over the country at night the last few months. If the Government doesn't care, DJI can remove the system they voluntarily implemented years ago. No legal requirement at this time.
Since DJI was the only drone company with Geo Fencing, I don't blame them for not wanting the additional legal liability. Just like driving a car, the driver (pilot) is responsible for following the law. I'm not going to blame Toyota if I run a red light.
If I had bought a drone, I would not have assumed it had protections to prevent me from flying in protected airspace. The fact that they put it in there, and then decided to remove it later, really just seems like an insult to the US gvt, though.
I am a drone operator and I agree with what they did. It has always been the responsibility of the pilot that they have the right permissions to fly where they are flying. The DJI no fly zones did not match up evenly with the FAA zones and it made it very cumbersome to fly in areas I was authorized to fly, but I have to jump through DJI hoops and hope they permit me to fly in an area I am legally allowed to fly in.
It is and always has been up to the drone operator to get airspace authorizations for controlled airspace. As stated, this was a voluntary program. One that unnecessarily opens the company up for lots of liability issues. Not to mention the cost of voluntarily keeping the data current and accurate. The FAA works with private companies via the FAA’s B4UFLY program to let operators know where restrictions are currently in place. Operators who fail to comply with restrictions also violate federal law.
The Government has demonstrated that they don't seem to care too much about drones in the air, as we've seen all over the country at night the last few months. If the Government doesn't care, DJI can remove the system they voluntarily implemented years ago. No legal requirement at this time.
Since DJI was the only drone company with Geo Fencing, I don't blame them for not wanting the additional legal liability. Just like driving a car, the driver (pilot) is responsible for following the law. I'm not going to blame Toyota if I run a red light.
If I had bought a drone, I would not have assumed it had protections to prevent me from flying in protected airspace. The fact that they put it in there, and then decided to remove it later, really just seems like an insult to the US gvt, though.
Although it's sus.......It's not a requirement and isn't even present on most drones.
Absolutely keep that firmware on a usb in a save in every state because it wont be long before they brick that update ..
Otherwise people build their own? Seems interesting.
I am a drone operator and I agree with what they did. It has always been the responsibility of the pilot that they have the right permissions to fly where they are flying. The DJI no fly zones did not match up evenly with the FAA zones and it made it very cumbersome to fly in areas I was authorized to fly, but I have to jump through DJI hoops and hope they permit me to fly in an area I am legally allowed to fly in.
It is and always has been up to the drone operator to get airspace authorizations for controlled airspace. As stated, this was a voluntary program. One that unnecessarily opens the company up for lots of liability issues. Not to mention the cost of voluntarily keeping the data current and accurate. The FAA works with private companies via the FAA’s B4UFLY program to let operators know where restrictions are currently in place. Operators who fail to comply with restrictions also violate federal law.