UAV DACH, the Germany-based European Association for Unmanned Aviation, is calling for protection of the drone economy from what it says are baseless demands for monetising the airspace.
“In the global competition for the best technologies and concepts, the young drone economy in Germany (and Europe) is facing decisive months and years to be able to hold its own against competition from Asia and the United States in the long term,” UAV DACH states. “Accordingly, many companies are critical of the initiative by Skynopoly GmbH. According to the initiative, property owners should be able to tap into a lucrative source of income by monetising overflight rights for drones and “flying taxis”. The problem: German law does not even provide for the possibility of charging money for overflights of property.”
In a March 11 press release, UAV DACH Chairman of the Board Dr. Gerald Wissel said that in order for the drone economy to exploit its full potential, suitable regulatory and economic framework conditions are vital, adding that “the industry must be protected from unfounded demands”.
The release goes on to set out the rules of the Air Traffic Act, which states that the use of airspace by aircraft is free. “This is a formulation that is explicitly reinforced in Section 21h Paragraph 1 of the Air Traffic Regulations with regard to unmanned aircraft. Although ownership of a property in principle also includes the space above the surface, Section 905 of the German Civil Code stipulates that the owner cannot prohibit any impact that is carried out at such a height that he has no interest in excluding it. A reservation of consent, as regulated in Section 21h Paragraph 3 No. 7 of the Air Traffic Regulations, can therefore only be asserted under certain conditions and at most in individual cases. The rules of the Air Traffic Regulations are also not intended as a basis for monetising airspace. Anything else would be incompatible with the principle of free use of airspace.”
“Even if the legal situation is already clear today, politicians and authorities should take a clear position here in order to prevent further uncertainty in the drone economy and to protect property owners from ultimately unfounded hopes,” said Dr. Wissel. “In addition, the legislature should make clarifying provisions in the relevant rules and regulations at the next opportunity in order to prevent unequal treatment of drones compared to other modes of transport and the associated competitive disadvantages.”
For more information
Image: Shutterstock