France Cries Foul At World Cup "Spy Drone" 138
mpicpp (3454017) writes with news of amateur drones appearing at the World Cup, quoting Ars Technica: "France's World Cup soccer team has filed a complaint with FIFA, claiming that someone used a small unmanned aircraft to spy on the team's training camp near São Paulo, Brazil as players prepared for their match against Honduras Sunday, the BBC reports. The quadrocopter appears from video to be a Phantom II autonomous micro-drone with a video camera.
'Apparently, drones are being used more and more,' France's manager Didier Deschamps told the BBC. 'We don't want intrusion into our privacy. It's hard to fight.' Deschamps did not comment on who might be behind the surveillance but said in an interview with Football Italia that he believed the drone was operated by one of France's potential opponents or by a French news agency." Police later captured the drone operator, who claimed just to be a fan bitten by a bit too much curiosity.
'Apparently, drones are being used more and more,' France's manager Didier Deschamps told the BBC. 'We don't want intrusion into our privacy. It's hard to fight.' Deschamps did not comment on who might be behind the surveillance but said in an interview with Football Italia that he believed the drone was operated by one of France's potential opponents or by a French news agency." Police later captured the drone operator, who claimed just to be a fan bitten by a bit too much curiosity.
French privacy laws are quite different (Score:5, Informative)
It's worth noting why the French team in particular, so vehemently object to drones, in a way that other nationals might not, or at least might do so less outspokenly.
In France you have ownership of your own image. A photographer needs to have your permission if they want to take a photo that has you as the main subject.
Obviously they don't need permission if you're just an incidental bystander or a face in a crowd. But if you're one of the primary subjects, then in France, you have to give your permission.
This also applies to merchandising and the law is often used in a similar way to trademarking or endorsement.
Baghdad needs drones (Score:0, Informative)
So the rest of the world can watch it blow up real good. LA car chases? Pfff! How about daily coverage of cars in Baghdad blowing up real good! FIFA in Brasil? Pfff! Baghdad blowing up real good is IMPOSSIBLE to beat. So,
Baghad needs drones! Send them NOW!
Re:No, you don't have an opt out. (Score:5, Informative)
You know how people know you are a true 'Murican?
Did you miss the part about local laws? This drone was in Brazil and I'm talking about the laws I know, which is Danish law - if you take a picture in Denmark, they can ask you to remove it and you must comply.
Just because you feel like your picture is important, doesn't mean some random stranger wants to be in on it.
Also, if the subject happens to be a model by trade, they can by local law sue you for the damages to their brand, if the picture you took end up on the internet (there are some exceptions to this). Again local law.
Re:A taste of things to come? (Score:5, Informative)
The use of the word drone to describe these is correct.
The Oxford English Dictionary includes the definition for a Drone as 'A pilotless aircraft or missile directed by remote control', a use that dates back at least to 1946 ("The Navy's drones will be..led—by radio control, of course—to a landing field at Roi."). There's no definition listed for a completely autonomous unit.