franklin_m

Some are wondering if the FAA can take action against your certificate as a result of doing things you shouldn't do with a drone. Thankfully, the answer to this question is known, and a quick search produced this:

ElectriMan

I don't know why this is posted here. Can you enlighten me what the purpose might be? Who are the "some"?

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

He can't post on RC Groups where the discussion originated so he brought it here.

Interesting information though.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

and he knows that they all watch what is posted over here, so he leaves it here for them to see.

ECHO24

I read it a couple of times and it's still not clear what "certificate" those enforcement actions were taken against as there's no other information. A Part 107 operator is also a "certificate" holder and I believe that's the case in a couple of those. One thing about Jonathan Rupprecht he's always drumming up business. Nothing like a helpful article to worry potential customers into paying for advice. He was also the lead attorney on the losing side in the RDQ Appeals Court case last July. Taking on a hobby RC case always seemed dodgy to me when his day job is representing commercial drone operators

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

playing both sides against the middle is a cherished and time honored method of making money in the legal profession.

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

LOL no kidding.

When I was getting divorced many years ago someone sent me what now would be a meme called "Family Law" and it was a cow with the wife pulling on the horns, the husband on the tail, and 2 lawyers milking dollar bills out of the udders.

ECHO24

Brendan Schulman is another one. Back when he was the darling of RC over the Trappy case, Schulman used to show off a picture of himself at 20 years-old with his Kaos 40 to boost his traditional RC cred. It was around that time the hero Brendan Schulman drafted AMA's FPV lawsuit against the FAA in 2014. It made AMA subservient to the drone mob, a hole they never dug out of. Of course it was hand-in-hand with Rich Hanson trying to turn some of that Trappy magic into $$. Schulman then signed on with DJI and spent six years helping wreck the RC flying hobby. DJI came out smelling like a rose under the final rule because they basically wrote it. Surprise! All DJI drones comply with Remote ID!

ECHO24

So nobody knows about Brendan Schulman? He used to be a regular on the AMA Chat Shack until he joined DJI and had to shush on the public comments. I got into an exchange with him over his spin on the Trappy loss but I cut it short. He's a lawyer after all, you have to have your ducks in a row. I smelled a dead rat but didn't know then all the pieces of the drone/FPV scam.

You think he just magically went to DJI?

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Franklin posted this because he felt it was of some interest to those who want to be informed about the legal aspect of this hobby.
I don't know why you feel you need to comment about a thread that obviously doesn't interest you...?