Drones

On August 28th the Denver Post reported that the Denver Police Department had shelved a consumer-grade drone recently purchased for nearly $3,000 after the administration nixed the crime lab’s plan to use it to photograph crime scenes.  Meanwhile, the Denver Fire Department intends to move forward with plans to purchase an Aeryon SkyRanger to use when dealing with all sorts of incidents, including structure fires, hazardous material spills and rescues. The difference between the failure of one program and the likely success of the other appears to turn on public perception.

This real world example highlights the critically important task of considering the risk or benefit to your reputation or brand as a result of your drone program.  Members of the public often have a visceral, negative reaction to drones. A poorly implemented program can anger customers, industry partners, and the public, thereby tarnishing a well-earned reputation and cause the demise of your program. At the extreme, angry landowners have been known to shoot down drones.  On the other hand, a well implemented program can position you as an industry leader using cutting-edge technology to provide the best, most reliable electric service while ensuring the safety of your employees.
Continue Reading Perception Is Reality

Anyone who operates a regional or nationwide business knows that coping with a patchwork of state and local laws can be challenging. Fortunately, the states also realize that this can be a problem, and will sometimes cooperate to voluntarily establish a “uniform” law.  For example, in 1952, a group of top legal scholars from the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) got together and drafted the Uniform Commercial Code.  This code has been adopted (with some variations) in every state, and has greatly improved predictability for business owners.

Over the past five years, most states have enacted laws regarding the use of unmanned aircraft. These laws vary wildly in what they permit and prohibit.  Right now, however, the NCCUSL is working on solving this problem by creating the uniform Tort Law Relating To Drones Act.  As with the Uniform Commercial Code, the NCCUSL hopes that every state will quickly adopt the Act as the basis for its state drone laws.…

Continue Reading Drones: A Uniformly Bad Law

In the wake of the Las Vegas shootings, MGM resorts is facing a barrage of lawsuits by victims claiming that the hotel was negligent in its security procedures.  In an unusual response, the hotel has filed its own lawsuit against the victims.  The MGM lawsuit is asking a court to rule that it is immune from suit because hotel security was handed by a vendor, Contemporary Services Corporation (CSC).  CSC, the hotel argues, has been approved by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) “for protecting against and responding to acts of mass injury and destruction” and, therefore, MGM is absolved from responsibility.

This pending action becomes relevant to the drone industry.  MGM is referring to legal protections provided by the Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2002, commonly known as “The Safety Act”.  The Safety Act, passed in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is intended to encourage the private sector to develop and implement anti-terrorist technologies by limiting the liability of companies that have such technology approved by DHS.  The act defines anti-terrorist technology broadly to include products, services, equipment, or devices designed, developed, modified, or procured for the purpose of preventing, detecting, identifying, or deterring acts of terrorism or limiting the harm from such attacks.…

Continue Reading Why Drone Manufacturers and Service Providers Should Care About the MGM Las Vegas Shooting Law Suit.