Apple Attempting to Limit Drone Flyovers in Cupertino

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,599
Apple now thinks it has more authority than the FAA as it is trying to impose a no-fly zone over its new Apple-mega-campus in Cupertino, California. The odd thing about this is that Apple zero authority of the airspace above its new building.

Call it paranoia or a wise move, either way, Apple is ramping up its secrecy. The company is now clamping down on overflying drones around its Apple Park campus in California. According to Apple Insider, security guards are tasked with telling drone operators that UAVs cannot be used in the airspace around the campus.

My suggestion is to tell Apple to shag up a pole and do what you want with the airspace that belongs to you, the citizens of the United States...of course that is until Apple owns it. At least you will still have your iPhone.
 
Meh, it goes both ways. My first reaction was the same as yours until I flipped it around. Wouldn't want one flying in my backyard, and its their private property. Besides, I wanna see if Apple will take the [H] approach and shoot 'em with a Apple branded smart shotgun.
 
Meh, couldn't care one way or the other. I see their park lasting about as long as the San Andreas, though I do keep my popcorn ready.
 
Apple should just buy some drones and crash into them, people will get the hint sooner or later... or run out of money
 
While I agree that you shouldn't be allowed to fly drones over private property. I'm not sure what authority Apple has to stop people from doing so. As far as I know corporations do not have more rights than people.
 
Money Talks, Kyle. If you've got enough of it you're pretty much able to do anything you want and get away with it.
 
I don't get the 'get off my lawn' attitude people have about drones.

If it is hovering outside your bedroom\bathroom window call the police.

50 or 100 feet up [and not obnoxiously loud] get over your self.

Like the person leaving work for the weekend and someone yells that's right go home, so they stay for 2 hours just to prove no one tells them what to do.
 
kju1 said:
So let me put my CFI hat on here for a second: Actually they sort of do within a limit. You cant stop a commercial plane from flying over the building but you do have a reasonable expectation of quiet enjoyment. That limit varies by local laws and is typically 80-500 feet. I say 500 is most likely the upper limit since thats where the federal definition of navigable airspace (except for takeoff and landing) begins. That may be changing soon.

They could very well say that a flight < 500 feet impedes their quiet enjoyment of the property and they would have a case. It happens all the time with other aircraft passing by (noise complaints etc).

Note you used to own all of the airspace until this case: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/328/256

Now all that legal crap aside. I agree with you. Apple should be told to shag off.
Click to expand...
I'd say that a 747 passing over me at 80-500 feet would pretty well impede my quiet enjoyment
 
Oniigumo said:
Meh, it goes both ways. My first reaction was the same as yours until I flipped it around. Wouldn't want one flying in my backyard, and its their private property. Besides, I wanna see if Apple will take the [H] approach and shoot 'em with a Apple branded smart shotgun.
Click to expand...
AFAIK, you have no right on that front either. Typically you own the ground/building (and maybe a shallow depth below the surface) and that's it.
 
Oniigumo said:
Apple branded smart shotgun
Click to expand...

It fires and reloads very quickly, the first year you own it. Even though it comes with the longest service plan, it inexplicably takes more and more time to load, the longer you own it. Despite its perceived image for quality and a corporate facade of environmental conscientiousness, if you attempt to have someone else replace the easily breakable trigger, the weapon will no longer fire. The base model holds 2 shells(which you can only buy from them). You can buy models that hold additional shells at $100 per additional increase in shell capacity. You can buy hideous aftermarket stocks that hold additional shells, but they make handling the piece more uncomfortable. Apple and suppliers are continually updating shell payload and the firing mechanisms. You can defer these updates, but if you do update and need to revert to an earlier configuration, you will not be able to do so. Apple's latest smart shotgun was designed such that one could no longer wear large ear muffs while reloading.
 
"security guards are tasked with telling drone operators that UAVs cannot be used in the airspace around the campus."

iAssholes can have their security guards stand there and "tell" me whatever they want to tell me, free country for speech (sorta). I will not be standing on or launching from their property, if they touch me or my copter, cool, I could use some iSuit dollars, and I'll get an iPhone to record the whole thing. I'll be out that way in February, hurry up and buy your privacy Apple.
 
Oniigumo said:
Meh, it goes both ways. My first reaction was the same as yours until I flipped it around. Wouldn't want one flying in my backyard, and its their private property. Besides, I wanna see if Apple will take the [H] approach and shoot 'em with a Apple branded smart shotgun.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a little fuzzy who I would side with... I certainly WOULD NOT want drones hovering over my property, even if they were silent.
BUT... currently it is completely legal to do that as long as certain rules are followed. And I'd accept it if all they did was cross my properly to get somewhere else.

BUT, BUT, what if the drone was taking pictures of me lounging in my totally fenced in backyard while flying by? That is DEFINITELY something that I DO NOT want.
Is it legal... Satellite geo-imaging companies do it all the time, as do other companies that hire small planes to do the same.

It was bearable in the recent past since large corporations and government entities were the parties that could afford to take aerial pictures of me lounging in my backyard, and would only post low resolution images publicly. Now that every dude with $500 can get a half decent long range camera quad-copter, it's going to be a lot more common.

I'm for freedom to do stuff as one pleases, but I'm also for my own privacy on my own property.

I'm going to have to side with Apple on this one... unless there is a clear journalistic reason (like investigations if the apple spaceship building is spewing toxic gas) to fly over any private property taking pictures or video at greater than say 20cm resolution it should be illegal. But if it's just a fly over, traversing the property to get somewhere else it should be OK.

Then that raises the question... how does one figure out if pictures are being taken or it's just a fly through though without intercepting the drone?
 
The right to fly drones when and where aside...

New, from Apple, the iHole. Equipped with a port for the Nosulus Rift, it's guaranteed to give Apple Fanbois the rise of a lifetime. Simply connect the free end of the silicon tubing that accompanies the special edition Nosulus Rift into the iHole port designed for it, strap the Rift on, and let her rip. Available soon in a one size fits all package, at all Apple Store outlets.
 
nilepez said:
AFAIK, you have no right on that front either. Typically you own the ground/building (and maybe a shallow depth below the surface) and that's it.
Click to expand...

Oh I completely agree with you from a legal stand point, I don't think there is any right to the airspace, I was just poking fun at the general sentiment towards drones around here. bbf pretty much nails how I feel about it. Is it legal? No idea, you're most likely in the clear to be flying the drone there. I don't think it's right though... Even if it is Apple.
 
there is a easy fix if the drone is a inspire 1 or 2 of any other dji brand get a FPVLR setup and take off miles away from apple HQ
 
Gotta disagree with the article. If it were in YOUR yard, how would you feel? Especially if you have privacy fences up, and wish to not be bothered?
 
Elf_Boy said:
I don't get the 'get off my lawn' attitude people have about drones.

If it is hovering outside your bedroom\bathroom window call the police.

50 or 100 feet up [and not obnoxiously loud] get over your self.

Like the person leaving work for the weekend and someone yells that's right go home, so they stay for 2 hours just to prove no one tells them what to do.
Click to expand...

Except its more than the bedroom window issue. What if you put up a huge privacy fence so you could be a nude sunbather and some kid flew a drone over the fence to spy on you. You are now guilty of exposing yourself to children and could be convincted of a sex offence in some states. Yes I am not shitting you - in MD if a child looks throug your window and sees you naked you are guilty of public indecency! How batshit crazy is that?

Nallexi said:
I'd say that a 747 passing over me at 80-500 feet would pretty well impede my quiet enjoyment
Click to expand...

Well it wouldnt becuase the FAA wont let an airport in without certain clearances. So youd never get that. And above 500 feet you dont really get a say so tough luck.

nilepez said:
AFAIK, you have no right on that front either. Typically you own the ground/building (and maybe a shallow depth below the surface) and that's it.
Click to expand...

Oniigumo said:
Oh I completely agree with you from a legal stand point, I don't think there is any right to the airspace, I was just poking fun at the general sentiment towards drones around here. bbf pretty much nails how I feel about it. Is it legal? No idea, you're most likely in the clear to be flying the drone there. I don't think it's right though... Even if it is Apple.
Click to expand...

And youd both be wrong. I did some further research last night and it turns out they DID decide on a precedent at one point. http://www.leagle.com/decision/19971401124F3d1277_11274/ARGENT v. U.S. So 360' above tallest structure or surface in rural areas or 500' period. So they techincally have every legal right to say you cannot fly over their property at or below the appropriate altitude. Which since drones are limited to 400 AGL or lower effectively gives them the right to block drones.

SparkedFire said:
Walt Disney World has a no fly zone.
Click to expand...

Because Disney is a theme park with over 2k people in it every day. Large gatherings of people often get TFRs (no fly zones in your terminology). For example all NFL games have an unpublished TFR from 1 hr before to 1 hr after the game. I can expand on this if youd like but I dont want to bore non pilots with the details...
 
The Apple campus is supposed to have 13k employees FYI.
 
leathco016 said:
Gotta disagree with the article. If it were in YOUR yard, how would you feel? Especially if you have privacy fences up, and wish to not be bothered?
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter, the law is not on their side (or yours). What they're doing right now amounts to harassment.
 
It would be a shame if Apple was researching an iTurret and had a few being field tested on the roof.



Not like there was every some sleek, cheeky, but overly nice turret out there to build off of.

hqdefault.jpg
 
Last edited:
Shoot them all down. Not only that, if it is possible to find the owner from the downed drone, fine them a large sum of money and increase it to a large percentages based on their yearly income if it is above a certain level.
 
People are understandably missing the point really which is: who gives a fuck about Apple? :D
 
snowcrash said:
Shoot them all down. Not only that, if it is possible to find the owner from the downed drone, fine them a large sum of money and increase it to a large percentages based on their yearly income if it is above a certain level.
Click to expand...

I say the solution to this is simple. Find the bellagio fountain designers and go set some records for the new apple fountain installation. The bellagio fountains already hit 460 ft.
 
Actually Apple do have a right to protect the airspace immediately around their facilities. Drones could be used for spying on R&D or they could injure someone or fall on infrastructure like the shitload of solar panels they have and you can bet the operator would just do a runner. Commercial aricraft are a completely different topic.
 
aokman said:
Actually Apple do have a right to protect the airspace immediately around their facilities. Drones could be used for spying on R&D or they could injure someone or fall on infrastructure like the shitload of solar panels they have and you can bet the operator would just do a runner. Commercial aricraft are a completely different topic.
Click to expand...

They do not! You have 0 control over private property airspace which was litigated and decided many years ago.

Your thought of commercial aircraft is very far off too.
 
VRT said:
They do not! You have 0 control over private property airspace which was litigated and decided many years ago.

Your thought of commercial aircraft is very far off too.
Click to expand...

You are incorect. See my previous post.
 
kju1 said:
You are incorect. See my previous post.
Click to expand...

You are right for 80-500 ft. BUT you can exceed the 500 ft with a drone in a lot of circumstances, if you are above 500 agl TELL them to pound sand.

BTW: For years we fought our neighbors on noise abatement going over their house etc. Nothing like once they piss you off a L25D without hush kits buzzing the house after roll. They were dicks after they build their houses at the end of the runway, they can goto hell IMHO.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top