Indeed. That's not the only ding on AMA. The original CBO requirement required programming for "all aspects" of RC aviation, effectively ruling out anyone but AMA. The new definition opens the door to groups like Flight Test. Maybe even tailored to Flight Test since they met with the people at FAA UAS Integration Office and made their own pitch, as opposed to the geniuses at AMA who tried to sue the FAA.

"3.3.2 ... Although the guidelines must be comprehensive, they need not discuss operations that are irrelevant to the
CBO. For example, if a CBO is not engaged in a particular type of operation (e.g., FPV or turbine-powered flight), they
would not be expected to develop safety guidelines related to that type of operation. An individual operating under a
CBO’s safety guidelines may only operate the types of operations addressed in those safety guidelines."

AMA also sued the FAA to allow compensation for RC flight training or demo flights. Another rebuke. "Recreational purposes may not include activities such as flights for any compensation, monetary or otherwise, and flights related to or in furtherance of a business." That's followed by, "Each individual pilot must maintain responsibility for compliance with the 49 U.S.C. § 44809(a)(1) requirement for recreational purpose, regardless of whether the event is sanctioned by a CBO [AMA] or otherwise presented as generally compliant with 49 U.S.C. § 44809(a)(1)."

Sad face for AMA and the FPVers. The FAA reiterated VLOS means an operator or spotter having the craft in sight at all times. No solo FPV. No flying a half mile away