Ok, the guy makes a map...but so does Google, and it has topo info, etc etc etc...
So does every GIS dude in the world.
If it is put on a white sheet of paper, that makes it illegal? What is the line?
I am very thankful that you have enough wisdom to train or get the training the fact you stated 6 months means you get it for sure. In our fast paced society I see a couple hours and BAM now you are out and a subject matter expert in collecting data. I would have no issues working under you for just that statement alone. I do not have a drone license yet. I have not processed much of today’s off the shelf data. However I have lots of formal training in Lidar remote sensing and many other mapping tools. It takes time and some good training to do it right. Now they may have made it so easy now that my knowledge acquired is for not. But I can’t help but think that some data sets are not as good as they think they are. I could be wrong for sure.
As I understood, he has been represented pro-bono by a free speech non-profit public advocacy foundation.
"What is the line?"
North Carolina seems pretty keen on FAFO.
If you've got the feels for the drone company, you can always relinquish any and all of your survey license(s), head to NC, and let us know how that works out.
The free speech argument in this case comes into play but neglects the commercial service of the date, geometrics and computing quantities for profit with no proven education, skills and adherence to national standards.
Google does not guarantee that their data in either imagery or topography is accurate. Their aerial images and topography are not claimed to be the most current images, and their drive by information is just for reference purposes. They are not a commercial enterprise where you pay for their data that you can rely on in our field of work. Their contours are scales and do not come from ground related control.
When you launch a drone and advertise that photos are available commercially, and that you can compute quantities based on the data of dimensions relating to the extracted data, especially with the need to ground proof them with set targets, that's not a fine line to cross, that's a clear violation of laws.
There are certainly changes that are pushing out traditionally reserved tasks from surveyors to others. This will continue to create conflicts. Mapping is one function, but surveyors have been excluded from much of that industry for a long time.
Construction staking is one of the new fronts. I have three subdivisions now under construction and no surveyors are involved with staking them. The only thing we will be doing is control, and later monumentation once the grading and infrastructure are completed.
For me that's no problem, other surveyors might have a different opinion.
However, since all the infrastructure is computer driven and attached to the equipment, there is no need to call us, make us reschedule, make the construction company wait.
it's a win-win from my perspective. I don't think we're going back to the days of lath and bluetops.
This ruling is all about whether the NC board's ruling constitutes a violation of freedom of speech. Which was the basis of the appeal. It (this ruling) really isn't about unlicensed practice.
Then relinquish your survey license(s) and assert your First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
It's your right, and the government cannot infringe on your constitutionally protected rights, right?
And your right to free speech supersedes (is superior to) any license to practice any profession, right?
that is not exactly the context of the ruling. The appellee is claiming that the photos that he publishes are protected by freedom of speech but the actual case is about the data behind them and how it is being used spatially and volumetrically.
Freedom of speech is not 100% protected, especially when it comes to protecting public health, safety and welfare. Under your context, I could hang a shingle, break out my cordless drill, rusty pliers and kitchen knives to call myself a Dentist or Doctor.
This is the original notification letter that was sent to Mr. Jones by the NC Board.
I don't think this is a "free speech" issue.
https://memberbase.com/ncbelsDiscDoc/showimage.aspx?Doc_Id=76978
