Drone (over) Regulation

This is excerpted from the Washington Post 8 Oct 2014 by Larry Downes . 
There is much more to the original piece so go read it, I recommend it.

(a commentary is included at the bottom)

America can’t lead the world in innovation if the FAA keeps dragging its feet on drone rules.

As the latest revolutionary digital technology takes off, entrepreneurs are finding themselves battling federal regulators for permission just to experiment with new applications. This time, it’s not the FCC (smartphone apps), the FTC (the Internet of Things), the FDA (genetic testing), the Department of Transportation (driverless cars), the Federal Reserve (bitcoin), state and local utility commissions (the sharing economy) or the SEC (crowdfunding). This time it’s the Federal Aviation Administration, which has been struggling since 2012 to develop rules for safely integrating unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), aka drones, into U.S. airspace.

To be clear, we’re not talking here about the lethal, multi-million dollar military aircraft that are changing the nature of warfare. We’re talking about small, consumer-friendly devices that sell today to hobbyists and others for less than $300. That’s about the same as the price of a smartphone, and the similarity is no coincidence. Most of the parts used in today’s fast-growing drone market come from smartphone component suppliers. The CPUs, GPS hardware, sensors, cameras, accelerometers, gyroscopes and even software are the same. And drones often use phones and tablets as their remote control. UAVs are basically flying smartphones.....UAVs have already proven themselves ready to disrupt everything from agriculture and natural resource management to law enforcement, delivery services, photography and mapping. 
...The FAA conservatively estimates that, within a decade, private drones will constitute a $90 billion industry. Already, according to the Consumer Electronic Association, 2014 sales of UAVs are forecast at $84 million and 250,000 units. ... Pretty impressive, especially for a technology that is technically illegal. That’s right: for now, consumers may only operate UAVs below 400 feet, and only for noncommercial uses. All other uses are prohibited. (After a small drone crashed in New York, the FAA has argued inconsistently that drones may not be operated anywhere near major airports.)...That could soon change. In 2012, Congress ordered the FAA to develop rules that would allow commercial UAVs to operate safely in U.S. airspace by 2015. (Safety, obviously, is key.) But we’re still waiting for the rules. The agency has already missed several self-imposed deadlines, and in June a government audit concluded the agency will miss Congress’s deadline. Rules for small drones were promised three years ago, with the FAA now saying they will come later this year. That delay could prove disastrous. ....Some communities have been motivated by obvious safety concerns, but more often the proscriptions are motivated by unease about privacy. So far, the privacy concerns have mostly been speculative. UAVs, like nearly every other mobile device, have high-definition cameras that continue to improve exponentially in both quality and capacity. So, like Google Glass and other new video technologies, UAVs tend to invoke a visceral “creepy” response in consumers, who imagine the worst possible uses such technologies might be put to against unsuspecting victims. They imagine drones hovering at their windows, back yards, or public protests....With the launch of the drone economy, the FAA has now joined the list of federal, state, and local agencies whose core markets are or are likely to be transformed by better and cheaper technologies. But so far, the agency hasn’t displayed much urgency in responding to the challenge and opportunity.

The fate of a multi-billion dollar industry is hanging in the balance. And as history has amply demonstrated, regulators who move too slowly often wind up sidelined or obsolete. Which would prove especially dangerous here. There is, after all, quite a difference between the crash of a smartphone app and a drone.

Larry Downes is co-author with Paul Nunes of “Big Bang Disruption: Strategy in the Age of Devastating Innovation” (Portfolio 2014). He is a Project Director at the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy.

Commentary

The article is a very well written statement for a light touch regulatory approach that favours innovation in disruptive contexts. I am not sure that I entirely buy the its going to be okay and old rules apply scenario but this article is completely in alignment with the argument of this blog - innovation does not end with commercialisation and regulation in times of disruption is irrelevant. Aviation authorities do urgently need to wrap their heads around commercial and non-commercial use  of drones and work out the rules they want to apply.