Well that gives a small glimmer of hope for large property owners.

(30-Dec-2021, 08:05 AM)Kevin2112 Wrote: Well that gives a small glimmer of hope for large property owners.

And small property owners as well.
And those renting or otherwise legally occupying private property.

To a point. But it also opens the door for local government to step in.. as it isn’t a political “hot button” and there isn’t a public safety concern (for now).. I don’t see them getting involved. Especially with the political climate today, Law enforcement has enough to deal with than “some kid flying his drone” last time I checked, Officers are leaving that job as fast as they can…
Prior to the Holidays, I drove past the local High School, there were some guys flying RC, fixed wing and Helos .. they said no one has bothered them, and believe it not there is a Police Station approx. 400 yards from where they were..Technically the school falls under Board of Education PD… and they are not exactly “high speed” guys..

Bruce shares his views in the video below and he thinks the FAA will just end up pulling out their "National Security" trump card which will just stamp all over any arguments that RDQ have put forward and make those arguments all void. So it's not over until the fat lady sings.

From what I can tell, RDQ did NOT win the lawsuit. Consequently, the Remote ID
regulations are going into effect. First, hitting the US manufacturers by requiring
that they only manufacturer Remote ID drones. Now, best that I can tell, the
sub-250 gram category is still exempt if you ONLY fly purely and solely for your
own recreation. Surely, the manufacturers know this and will continue to offer
sub-250 gram quads without Remote ID.

Anybody see, read, or know anything different from this ???

It's been complete radio silence since the Court of Appeals hearing back in December last year which makes you wonder if it's bad news and that they have now given up the fight. I don't know how long COA hearings in the US usually take to come come to some kind of decision / conclusion but 7 months have now passed with not even a whisper which seems unusual to me.

RDQ haven't even posted the COA hearing information on their update page (HERE) and there are is no updated information in the official Wikipedia article either (HERE).

There is a thread on another forum HERE also discussing the case but that thread also fell silent in January this year until someone added a new post last week, but there has been no further response to that.

IIRC the deadline that manufacturers had to start including Remote ID devices in off-the-shelf manufactured drones was the 3rd quarter of this year, so we're only 3 months away from that now.

Pilot's Institute just put out a video about Remote ID. The tone of the video is
that the FAA regulations will go into effect on the previously scheduled dates.
There was no mention of any lawsuits and no mention of any delays. If appears
as if things are going to go through.

In the video, he did mention, very briefly, about the exemption for sub-250 gram 
drones that are flown for recreation only. This was sort of tossed in as a "have to"
thing since he didn't dwell on it nor make any further mention of it. Almost like
they don't really want people to know about it. 

Unless something happens VERY SOON, this Remote ID regulation WILL be going
into effect. After that, we will see how the FAA approaches it, how they disseminate
information, how they intend to "train" law enforcement, what they put out to the
general public, and how they intend to actually enforce the regulations.

Unfortunately the latest news is that RDQ have lost their lawsuit against the FAA so the implementation of Remote ID is going ahead in the USA as per the original proposal. Details are in the post linked to below...

https://intofpv.com/t-remote-id-rdq-vs-f...s-faa-wins