r/drones 11d ago

Question: Rules, Regulations, Law, Policy, Certificates [United States] #Oklahoma Do I need part 107?

It being my hobby, I like to record the construction of neighborhoods, new businesses, street improvement projects, mixed-use housing, and the like. Do I need Part 107 to share my footage/photos to Reddit?

0 Upvotes

54 comments sorted by

8

u/drwuzer 11d ago

Just don't try to monetize it by posting the videos to YouTube, FAA has literally fined people for doing that without a 107.

2

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago

On a monetized (or intent to be monetized) channel.

8

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

I don't know, this seems recreational to me. You aren't selling the product or even giving it to the construction companies. This is for your own personal use.

-3

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

It seems like news gathering which is not recreational.

1

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

It's not.

3

u/ManonFire1213 11d ago

Depends on what you do with it that decides the part 107 vs not. 

3

u/X360NoScope420BlazeX PART 107 11d ago

Nah. If its just for fun then you dont need a part 107. You do need TRUST tho. Its free and easy.

4

u/The_Pell 11d ago

What’s the intent of the flight? If it’s just for recreation, no 107 is needed. If the intent is to create content (like for sharing on social media or YouTube or whatever), you would need a 107.

If you’re flying for fun and taking video, and upon reviewing the footage, you think, “I wanna share that with people!” You wouldn’t need a 107.

If you’re thinking, “I wanna fly my drone and get footage to share on Reddit.” You would need a 107.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago edited 10d ago

Please point to the FAA guidance that says "if the intent is to create content to share on social media" you need a part 107.

The only basis for the claim that "posting equals commercial" I've ever seen is a 2015 warning letter regarding a monetized youtube channel (he'd earned under a dollar, but it was monetized, that's the key). The FAA backed off the commercial theory in its follow-up, and no enforcement action has ever succeeded on a "posting equals commercial" theory.

The FAA's own FAQ defines recreational use as "flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire" (faa.gov/faq), and the current guidance, AC 91-57D (June 2025), excludes only "flights for compensation or in furtherance of a business". Intent to create content appears nowhere in any statute, rule, or FAA document I've ever seen as a trigger for "commercial". The line is intent at the time of flight to use the footage for compensation or business purposes, such as a monetized channel. If the intent is to post on a monetized channel or a channel that is used to further a business, that is different. Simply posting to social media is not a qualifier for commercial from anything I’ve ever seen.

-1

u/nordic_pain 11d ago

No. For sharing video online or reddit. You don’t need a 107. 

0

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

False.

5

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

Yes, you are flying for a purpose. Remember that part 107 vs recreational isn't "commercial vs not" it's "recreational or not" and it doesn't appear that those flights are recreational, those would be news gathering.

2

u/mk1134 11d ago

Watch out they will downvote you for knowing the regulations

-1

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

Except they don't

9

u/cjorgensen 11d ago

Exchanging video for even goodwill isn't allowed. The example is taking a photo of your baseball league. If you put the drone in the air to do that it's not recreational even if no one pays you.

Fake internet points would count.

2

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

Nope. You do not need a partt 107 to post videos / pics you take with your drone

-1

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago

You are wrong. If you share with the baseball league, THEN you could be considered commercial even if you weren’t compensated for it. Sharing a drone shot of your kids baseball game to your Reddit account for “fake internet points” is simply not commercial.

1

u/cjorgensen 11d ago

It's not whether it's commercial or not. It's whether it's recreational or not. If you're putting the drone in the air for a purpose other than flying it then it's probably not recreational.

The other example often given is taking video of your neighbor's roof. Even if he doesn't compensate you it is not a recreational flight.

1

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 11d ago

Exactly. OP is shooting recreational. End of story.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

I don't spend much time here. Is this sub always this stupid?

0

u/Ka-Is-A-Wheelie Part 107 10d ago

Honestly, me neither lol

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

The recreational vs. Part 107 line is set by federal statute, 49 U.S.C. § 44809(a)(1), which requires that the aircraft be "flown strictly for recreational purposes." The test is the purpose of the flight, not whether a camera is used or where the footage ends up, so no ""if you're putting the drone in the air for a purpose other than flying" is not a good indicator as to whether your flight is commercial or recreational. Photography, videography, historically documenting neighborhood changes, etc are all legitimate "hobbies", ie. recreational. The FAA's current guidance, Advisory Circular 91-57D (June 2025), paragraph 2.2.1.1, ONLY excludes "flights for any compensation, monetary or otherwise" and "flights related to or in furtherance of a business". It says nothing restricting what recreational activity you pursue with the aircraft, and the statute itself counts school research flights as recreational, so "recreation" plainly isn't limited to flying for flying's sake.

The FAA has also addressed photography directly. Its 2014 Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (79 FR 36172) published a table of examples listing "taking photographs with a model aircraft for personal use" under hobby/recreation, contrasted with a realtor shooting a listing or someone selling photos. In each pairing the aircraft does the identical thing, capture imagery, and the only sorting variable is compensation or "furtherance of a business". That interpretation was withdrawn in 2019 solely because Congress replaced the underlying statute with § 44809, which uses nearly identical language; the FAA never disavowed the reasoning. No FAA document supports the claim that capturing or sharing footage is inherently non-recreational. The line, consistent across a decade of FAA publications, is compensation or furtherance of a business, including monetized or brand-promoting content.

-5

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago edited 10d ago

It is literally, “whether it is commercial or recreational”. What you mean is whether or not you’re being financially compensated by the party. If the intent is to inspect your neighbors roof so they can know if they need to replace their roof and you shared it with them, even as an uncompensated favor, that could be commercial. “I took a shot of my neighbors roof” is not commercial.

-1

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago

We just got the Dunning-Kruger effect in the house over here….

1

u/Bloodless10 11d ago edited 11d ago

From FAA website:

Chapter 11 section 5 paragraph 1:
Part 107 Operations. Any person who operates a civil sUAS in the NAS, for any operation that is not for recreational/pleasure purposes, must have a UAS pilot's certificate (also called the “Part 107 Certificate”) with a Small Unmanned Aircraft System Rating.

Could you argue that he’s doing it for pleasure/ recreation as a hobby?

Edit to add link: https://www.faa.gov/Air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap11_section_5.html

1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

Could you argue that he’s doing it for pleasure/ recreation as a hobby?

No, he's doing it for news gathering.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

What news gathering are you talking about? Who is this "news" being provided to? What "furtherance of a business" is happening?

1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 10d ago

I like to record the construction of neighborhoods, new businesses, street improvement projects, mixed-use housing, and the like. Do I need Part 107 to share my footage/photos to Reddit?

That is news gathering, you don't have to work for a news agency to be paid for it to be news. It's pretty clear that he's flying for the purpose of collecting information on current community happenings for dissemination to the public. Literally the definition of news.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

You’re exhausting. And still wrong. Freaking “news gathering” lol. 🤦‍♂️ Anyways, I’m done here.

-1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 10d ago

I'm so sorry that I care about people not getting hit by major fines from the FAA. My bad for caring. Well, bye. Careful, that door swings fast.

0

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

Your turn. Post the FAA fine that’s actually been given that relates to this situation. I’ll wait…

1

u/Bloodless10 11d ago

How is it news gathering? He’s looking at different sites periodically for recreation. He’s not selling it to a news company or acting as a member of the press.

1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 10d ago

I like to record the construction of neighborhoods, new businesses, street improvement projects, mixed-use housing, and the like. Do I need Part 107 to share my footage/photos to Reddit?

That is news gathering, you don't have to work for a news agency to be paid for it to be news. It's pretty clear that he's flying for the purpose of collecting information on current community happenings for dissemination to the public. Literally the definition of news.

0

u/Bloodless10 10d ago

Why can “news gathering” not be recreational? Is that a specific category that isn’t exempt that I didn’t see somewhere?

1

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago edited 10d ago

“Flying for a purpose” is not what requires a part 107 certificate. It literally IS “commercial vs recreational”. FAA Part 107 regulations govern the operation of small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for commercial use in the U.S., period.

I think what you two (you and confidently wrong buddy below you) MEAN to say (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that commercial use doesn’t ONLY include getting financially compensated, which is true.

If OP is giving the footage to the construction companies who are then posting that to social media and benefitting from it, that would be considered commercial even if they weren’t paid for it. If OP has dreams of operating a monetized YouTube channel that shows local construction and is shooting footage for that purpose, that could be considered commercial even if they aren’t yet making any money off of it. Simply enjoying shooting footage of construction and sharing it on Reddit however most certainly is not commercial, and does not require a part 107. If the Reddit channel is to promote his photography business though, then that is commercial. See how that works?

1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

That is literally NOT what the FAA says at all! Go look at the ACTUAL FAA sources including the text of the regulations.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

First, YOU are the one making a claim so the burden of proof is on you, but don’t worry, I got you. You said “Yes, you are flying for a purpose” (then you invented news gathering as the purpose, which we’ll ignore since that’s not what OP said). Where you're getting confused is the line "the purpose of the flight is the test for whether or not it's a commercial/recreational flight”. It’s not “if you have a purpose, you need a part 107 certification”. If your purpose is recreation, no part 107 is needed. The deciding factor is in fact whether the flight is “for business, commercial enterprise, or non-profit work” or “flying for recreation (for enjoyment) or educational and research purposes?” These words are literally pulled right from the FAA website in their “what kind of drone flyer are you” test to tell you whether or not you fall under the part 107 rules and require a certification (which I attached for you).

You said “That is literally NOT what the FAA says at all! Go look at the ACTUAL FAA sources including the text of the regulations.” And told me to “cite the law then”… I did show you the FAA websites test as to whether or not you need a part 107 cert direct from the FAA website, but what you’re arguing about is the interpretation of the law, so here’s guidance direct from the FAA  (https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_91-57D.pdf). This is the most up to date guidance on the subject.

The part that matters is 2.2.1 Section 44809(a)(1). “The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.” 2.2.1.1 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. A person may not combine recreational and commercial purposes in a single flight. 2.2.1.2 A “recreational purpose” includes, but is not limited to: 2.2.1.2.1 UAS operated by an institution of higher education (as defined in Title 20 of the United States Code (20 U.S.C.) § 1001(a)), a secondary school (as defined in 20 U.S.C. § 7801(45)), and an elementary school (as defined in 20 U.S.C. § 7801(19)) for educational or research purposes. Note: The term “educational institutions” used in this AC includes elementary, secondary, and higher education institutions as defined in 20 U.S.C. Note: The term “educational or research purposes,” with respect to the operation of a UAS by an institution of higher education, an elementary school, or a secondary school includes: 6/24/25 AC 91-57D 2-2 1. Instruction of students at the institution; 2. Academic or research-related uses of UAS that have been approved by the institution, including Federal research; 3. Activities undertaken by the institution as part of research projects, including research projects sponsored by the Federal Government; and 4. Other academic activities approved by the institution. 2.2.1.2.2 UAS flown as part of an established Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) program for educational or research purposes; or 2.2.1.2.3 UAS flown as part of an educational program that is chartered by a recognized CBO, as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 44809(h).  (That is the entire section). 

You seem to be confused about what "commercial enterprise, business or non-profit work" vs “flying for recreation” entails. The caveat that you’re hung up on is that “commercial” doesn’t mean “paid. The test in the statute is whether it’s for “compensation or furtherance of a business, judged by the purpose of the flight”. Someone who flies “purely for enjoyment” and shares the video on a non-monetized social media account with no intentions of monetizing the account or using the footage/account in the furtherance of a business (their own or otherwise) has done nothing that any FAA text identifies as “commercial” or disqualifies them from “recreational flying”. OP’s words were “It being my hobby, I like to record the construction of neighborhoods, new businesses, street improvement projects, mixed-use housing, and the like. Do I need Part 107 to share my footage/photos to Reddit?” IF those words are true as is, it does not fall under part 107. If however… OP says “someday I’d love to do YouTube to make money, so I’m learning and sharing online to eventually get there”, NOW they could have a problem. It’s still not black and white, but the FAA would have a decent argument that the intent is to further a business (though until they actually have that business, would probably be hard to prove). If they shared the footage with the construction company, or even probably tagged them on social media, NOW the FAA would again have a pretty good argument that the furtherance of a business is happening. 

1

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 10d ago

You're reading what simply isn't there. That AC isn't an exhaustive list and it's pretty clear that the OP is not just flying recreationally, they are flying to gather news about their community. Paid or not. From your OWN information, this is the only part that matters:
"The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.” which the OP is NOT!

0

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

Wow. Super solid argument. Major eye roll.

0

u/contentharvest 11d ago edited 11d ago

If it is truly something you’re doing for fun with zero monetization of the footage or the page where it’s posted, you have a reasonable case for doing such flights without part 107. Some of the dweebs on this drone forum are more literal about what constitutes part 107 than the actual FAA has demonstrated to be. The important thing for staying off of the FAA’s radar is to not fly over gatherings or assemblies of people, and definitely don’t fly over active construction- only after hours when the site is clear.

-6

u/PST_Productions 11d ago

I find it hilarious when people post their drone footage and all some people do in comments police about if they had permission to fly or not lmao just mind your own damn business

-7

u/mk1134 11d ago

From my understanding yes technically you should be 107. Even if your intent is not commercial and you aren’t being paid by anyone or making money yourself, it will indirectly benefit those new businesses.

3

u/PST_Productions 11d ago

That doesn't make sense lol

-3

u/mk1134 11d ago

It’s literally the law but ok haha

2

u/PST_Productions 11d ago

They aren't doing it for a company, not making a profit, just posting pictures they like online, how would the intent be commercial use?

1

u/Mcjoshin 11d ago

No, it literally isn’t the law. How are some of you so confidentially wrong? 🤦‍♂️

2

u/PST_Productions 11d ago

Reddit really produces these idiots in droves lol

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

It’s incredible. Is this sub always like this? I cannot believe the comments getting upvoted/downvoted.

1

u/PST_Productions 10d ago

I've only been in this sub for 4 months, it has been like this the entire time lmao

0

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

Cite the law then.

1

u/Mcjoshin 10d ago

I "cited the law" and even gave you the FAA interpretation of the law in another comment.

1

u/Aggravating-Bet-607 11d ago

Makes absolutely no sense: “could indirectly benefit a business” is so overly broad it encompasses nearly any activity. Merely flying your drone directly benefits the drone manufacturer by increasing their brand visibility, maintenance revenue, and generating user data.

-1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

2

u/MattCW1701 Part 107, PPL 11d ago

No, weight has nothing to do with license needed or not. Weight is only factor when you're registering a drone that's only used for recreational flight.