Commentary — Houston, we may have a problem
When technologies emerge, there is always a delicate dance between regulation and innovation, and it is generally a clumsy one. In this country, those two “partners” generally evolve together. That does not appear to be the case with the drone industry. The FAA’s actions (and inaction) may prove to be a case study in how regulation thwarts growth.
History has taught us that regulation can hamper innovation and prevent an industry from thriving. England took an early lead in the development of the automobile, but Henry Ford (and the US) came to dominate it largely because he was unfettered of the regulations imposed on British automobile companies (speed limits, car occupants). The automobile industry found a warm home and a long future here in the states.
It appears that drone manufacturers are also finding a warm home . . . in China and France where they can operate free from onerous regulatory constraint. As noted in a recent article on CBC News, “When it comes to using drones for research and commercial purposes, Jara and Laliberté say Canada is a world leader for its progressive stance — especially compared to the U.S., which has imposed a near-universal ban on commercial drones.”
There is a certain unfortunate irony in this. Ford reaped the benefits sown by the industrial revolution. Last week, we heard Japan’s Prime Minister state, “Investment is the key to a productivity revolution and it is through investment that we will lead the world in realizing a fourth industrial revolution. I believe that the challenge for a fourth industrial revolution is all about speed.” In his, comments he encouraged removing regulatory red tape that impedes robotic development (see Japanese Government to Slash Drone Regulations).
Here the FAA is being driven by fear and uncertainty rather than promise and opportunity. It is largely fear of high consumer drone sales during the holiday season that impelled the FAA to convene a task force (view members here) to develop recommendations for registration of non-commercial drones. According to the FAA, the discussions “included how an operator might prove a UAS is registered, how the aircraft would be marked, and how to use the registration process to encourage or require UAS operators to become educated on basic safety rules.” Final recommendations are due to the FAA on 11/20.
And then there is that nonsense in New York
In an ill conceived “we will show you who’s boss” moment, the FAA fined a Chicago-based aerial photography company $1.9 million dollars. The FAA alleges SkyPan “conducted 65 unauthorized operations in some of our most congested airspace and heavily populated cities, violating airspace regulations and various operating rules, the FAA alleges. These operations were illegal and not without risk. “ (see FAA press release here). What they don’t say is that SkyPan brought these flights to their attention. SkyPan received a “333” exemption in 2015 and had been in contact with the FAA as early as 2005 regarding permitting of its drone flights. As they note in their response to the FAA, they have “a 27-year record of providing aerial view panoramas to residential real estate clients in major U.S. cities without a single instance of personal or property damage, without a single instance of invasion of privacy, and without a single instance of jeopardizing security or safety.” (You can find their full response here.) SkyPan goes on to state that they fly only in clients’ air space and only up and down (i.e. within the air space owned by a specific construction project). Regardless, a $1.9 million fine on a small business in an emerging market for offenses they acknowledged seems a bit onerous and chilling. The FAA is now weighing the response from SkyPan. Let’s hope the FAA can back out of an embarrassing situation. It should not be making an example of some honest business people for its lack of crafting responsible clear regulations.
And we do need regulations. There are issues of safety, privacy ,etc., but all those issues cut two ways. Drones also provide additional safety and security in emergency situations; they equip news organizations with an important news gathering tool. Regulation and innovation should evolve together. As noted by Sam Moore, COO of Oxford Economics, “There is widespread agreement that public policy should focus on facilitating innovation. Businesses require flexible, well-crafted, and especially clear and predictable regulation in order to make the investments in R&D that are critical to innovation.”
At the moment draconian regulation is stifling innovation and chilling business growth. The FAA needs to moderate its position and not be afraid to look to Japan and Canada for more intelligent ways to approach this emerging market in a manner that allows the US to innovate and grow to its maximum potential.
Related links and references:
- FAA press release on Skypan fine
- Two takes on regulating drones – from Lawyer’s Weekly
- UAS Registration Task Force members – from FAA
- UAS REgistration task force day 3 – from FAA
- Thoughts on Drone Registration by an International Press Freedom Coalition– from PetaPixel
Frank Schroth can be reached at frank@dronelife.com.
Frank Schroth is editor in chief of DroneLife, the authoritative source for news and analysis on the drone industry: it’s people, products, trends, and events.
Email Frank
TWITTER:@fschroth