To Be or Not To Be – F.A.A. Drone Registration Mandate

T he recent F.A.A. mandate calling upon all drone owners to register their .55 to 55 lb. drones using an honor system is better suited to fiction, perhaps in a classic novel where the characters are all honest and there are no crimes. The F.A.A. made a good first try in its attempt to control the mayhem that may occur after millions of drones were unwrapped on Christmas Day, 2015. The F.A.A.’s registration system has many shortcomings. Although it may be a good start for a “phase one” stage, relying on the honor system to register drones lacks teeth. With the current system, there’s no way to enforce mandatory registration upon those who would not voluntarily register their drones, including hobbyists or those with more malicious intent to invade privacy, cause harm or worse.  Perhaps a self-policing honor-based registration system would be a better fit for the commercial Drone industry rather than for hobbyists. The honor-system registration database was made for small drone manufacturers in particular. The small drone manufacturers fear that a more enforceable system will cause a decline in their sales, so they are attempting to limit control by lawmakers over drone-related regulations. Commercial users would likely comprise the majority of those who would voluntarily register their drones, not the hobbyists.

The F.A.A.’s new Drone registration system does not actively enforce drone registration for drone owners – mostly hobbyists – who are anti-registration and refuse to register their drones, stating that their privacy is being intruded upon. Whether they may have mischievous or malicious intent remains to be seen.

For the Drone Industry to evolve, it is crucial to develop a stronger and more enforceable registration system with a searchable national database that can identify owners or their drones, and trace drones from the date and origin of their manufacture to the date and location that they’re sold and brought home. Drones need to be imprinted with an electronic identification marker like the VIN number that is imprinted on every motor vehicle that’s used on land, water or in the air. VIN numbers are assigned during manufacture. It will not be difficult for manufacturers to add an electronic marker-type of identification on drones, since such a marker can easily be made as part of the drone’s composition, similar to a vehicle identification number (VIN number) that is assigned to every motor vehicle.

An electronic VIN number identification database that is developed and integrated into the DMV systems will enable authorities to know who owns and operates drones, therefore making drone operators more accountable for their actions. Integrating drone registration with the DMV would add a needed level of security for all aircraft and flying vehicles in the sky and help protect the privacy and safety of people and property from mischief and malicious behavior.

With the exception of Hawaii, where city or local governments process registration, all states have a DMV system in place that can communicate with a National Drone Database System. In general, whatever the drone ID becomes, it will be created and documented for each drone at the manufacturer and transferred to the dealers, distributors, and retailers, the same way that material and registration information is transmitted to DMVs for motor vehicles as they make their way from manufacturers through Customs at the port of entry, then to the distributor or dealership and finally to the customer.  The VIN number is inseparable from the vehicle. So, too, must there be an ID like the VIN number that is assigned to drones that can be documented and tracked.

With a DMV-integrated ID system in place, once a drone is purchased by a hobbyist, a business, military or enterprise customer, it becomes the responsibility of the buyer to register their drone via the DMV system designated for their geographic location and type of desired use. With such a system in place, it becomes possible to designate unregistered drones as “hostile” and levy much stiffer penalties upon those who do not register their drones. Just as it is unlawful to drive an unregistered car, it will become unlawful to operate an unregistered drone, which will be considered a threat. Since the unregistered drone is considered a threat, it can be taken down without fear of recourse by angry drone owners who refused to register their drones, which will be considered air vehicles.  Once drones are treated by law enforcement as vehicles and not toys, law enforcement entities, vehicle-related rules come into play for registration and operation. Law enforcement entities will be better equipped to protect and defend the public from drone-related hazards.

With a unique electronic ID marker assigned to each drone that is documented from the manufacturer to every point of the distribution channel, including the retailer and the customer, it will be easier to track rogue drones to their owners because retailers will be required to document drone purchases by ID number and customer, reporting this information to the DMV-integrated Drone Registry database. The customer will have a specified time period to register their drone, just as if they were buying a car, boat, motorcycle, airplane or other vehicle.

With a unique electronic ID marker assigned to each drone that is documented from the manufacturer to every point of the distribution channel, including the retailer and the customer, it will be easier to track rogue drones to their owners because retailers will be required to document drone purchases by ID number and customer, reporting this information to the DMV-integrated Drone Registry database. The customer will have a specified time period to register their drone, just as if they were buying a car, boat, motorcycle, airplane or other vehicle.

As Whitmarsh Research Group researched and analyzed what the world of Drones would look like from different points of view, including hobbyists, non-hobbyists /non-commercial individuals or clubs commercial business from small to large, government groups, and large enterprises, we asked what the safety and privacy issues would be for drone users and the public at large.  How can the public be protected from everything from invasion of privacy to malice, physical or property damage?  In May, 2015, we discussed these issues with Joseph Lamonaca, a principle of The National and International Pilot Defense Aviation Law Firm http://www.avlaw.us .

Lamonaca agreed with us that drone operators should be treated like aircraft pilots and be subjected to the same qualification, certification and licensing process that pilots undertake to be certified to fly an aircraft. Other points that were discussed included safeguarding aircraft from drones, protecting the national airspace from rogue drones, and protecting individuals and private property from drone intrusion. After discussing certain dangerous drone flight scenarios and ways to combat malicious drone operators, Mr.Lamonaca made a disconcerting comment that influenced us to escalate the development of our Drone Defense System. He thought that our vision would be, “A low level consideration, until a drone-related catastrophe or disastrous event occurs, no one will pay enough attention to this, it’s our human nature to wait until something terrible happens, then react to it.” Lamonaca agreed that stronger measures of enforceable safety are needed, along with proper training and detailed identification and tracking of drones. He also agreed that there should be stronger penalties for drone operators who cause harm to people or property or who or cause catastrophic or disastrous events.

The current registration concept will be tested and found to be lacking because it does not adequately protect individuals, aircraft, property or privacy. The F.A.A. has made a good first effort but must expand upon it to include enforceability, better tracking and identification. Only then will public safety and privacy be better preserved while enabling hobbyists to enjoy safer drone flight and businesses to pursue drone use.

Written by Peter and Shana Whitmarsh, founders of Whitmarsh Research Group and inventors of the patented UAV Defense System (U.S. Patent Number 11022407.)