Factory in Warsaw visit - photos and my interview with guard (June 4, 2025)

[SichuanHot]

I'd bet somewhere in the Indiana code there is a section on prohibition of surveillance of private property.

If it's private property, the decision is usually between the property owners and the drone operators. Of course, the drone operator has to have their FAA 107 and follow airspace regulations assuming the video will be used in a commercial manner. Airspace is federally managed so Indiana doesn't have a say in how it's used

 

[Swinefuzz]

Leave Slate Auto Alone!!

 

[1yeliab_sufur1]

Leave Slate Auto Alone!!

We will once we get our trucks/suv muahahahahaaaaaas

 

[ucfknights123]

What is anyone expecting to see if they fly a drone over or get access? It's just going to look like any other manufacturing facility.

 

[SichuanHot]

Thanks. In 2012, I was in meetings with the FAA on how to integrate drones into the national air space surveillance system. Years before the FAA issued Part 107. I know the regs, well.

However, I was actually discussing the legality of unauthorized surveillance of private property. The flying of a drone in compliance with FAA regs is immaterial to the discussion.

See next post.

Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-46-8.5-1 relates to "Unlawful Photography and Surveillance on Private Property." This statute generally makes it a Class A misdemeanor to knowingly and intentionally conduct electronic surveillance of another person's private property without their permission.

For drones specifically:

Indiana Code IC 35-31.5-2-123.5 includes specific provisions regarding unauthorized drone use and privacy. It states that pilots cannot use drones to photograph or record individuals on private property without permission. Violating this law can lead to criminal charges or fines.

That's pretty cool. From what I gather the 107 regulations are really mostly for drones for commercial use eg power line inspections, real estate, farming, movie production, and other big money endeavors. They still apply for hobbyists, but it's not really enforced. Basically just be smart about how you fly and don't be a DJIdiot.

What @evtruth was specifically talking about was explicitly asking Slate permission before flying, so Slate as the private property owner/lessee would give @evtruth permission to fly, and thus everything would be legally sound. Sure, Indiana has rules for drone use on private property, but the actual airspace above said private property is still federally governed. In any case that's irrelevant because there's no desire to fly over private property without the property owners' explicit permission.

 

[SichuanHot]

It depends on the class of air space but below 400 feet is not Federal. Around airports is a different story.

All airspace up to 60000ft MSL in the USA is regulated by the FAA, even the unregulated class G airspace. It's just called that because there's no need for ATC clearance to fly drones there. The 400 ft AGL legal restriction is only for UAS operators. Any drone pilot can fly in any airspace, even ROZ and MOAs as long as they have the right permissions.

 

[SichuanHot]

You are missing the point. Just because the FAA has jurisdiction over control of aircraft in a particular air space (i.e. over someone's private property) for the purposes of safety within the air space doesn't mean the state of Indiana can't regulate what happens within that air space related to photographic surveillance of private property.

Absolutely, but @evtruth never suggested flying without asking for permission so your concerns about privacy laws don't matter.

 

[cadblu]

Actually, the security guard said this...

Stop! Or I'll say Stop Again!

 

[SichuanHot]

The OP asked a security guard, whose response was perfect, "We'll call the police on you." LOL.

His intentions were right. The person who he asked is wrong. I don't see the issue.

 

[cvollers]

It's the private company's private business as to their execution of moving their product from prototype to full rate production, why do we need to know? Curiosity is not a proper intention. It's just being nosey. A bit creepy in my opinion. Just let the company alone.

If they want to release progress reports, great. We don't need to spy on them. Lol.

Or they could release progress reports (like another EV company that starts with “S”) that always say the same thing.

 

[SichuanHot]

It's the private company's private business as to their execution of moving their product from prototype to full rate production, why do we need to know? Curiosity is not a proper intention. It's just being nosey. A bit creepy in my opinion. Just let the company alone.

If they want to release progress reports, great. We don't need to spy on them. Lol.

That's a fair opinion to have, but I disagree that taking drone videos of a company's property when given explicit permission to do so is a bad thing. There's nothing wrong with excitement and curiosity over Slate. If anything, they can leverage that enthusiasm from prospective customers to really flesh out their relationship with their user base.

Hiring fake and paid off influencers to showcase a new product is bad. Organic curiosity from actual customers that in turn ends up as marketing material is 100x better.

 

[GreatLakes]

Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-46-8.5-1 relates to "Unlawful Photography and Surveillance on Private Property." This statute generally makes it a Class A misdemeanor to knowingly and intentionally conduct electronic surveillance of another person's private property without their permission.

For drones specifically:

Indiana Code IC 35-31.5-2-123.5 includes specific provisions regarding unauthorized drone use and privacy. It states that pilots cannot use drones to photograph or record individuals on private property without permission. Violating this law can lead to criminal charges or fines.

Has this law ever been enforced and held up in court? I can bring up Google Earth or Maps, and get pretty detailed photography of most anywhere. Has everyone in Indiana agreed to this, or is the Alphabet C-suite in jail?

Don't really have a dog in this fight, but as a landowner I thought someone could fly a drone inches above my property and there wasn't anything I could legally do.

I will say that I had a ride in a powered parachute several years ago, sitting in front of the guy that had recently won the US Nationals for PPC piloting. We were cutting around the airstrip, went about 50' high through a backyard. The people were sitting on their back deck, could even see some inside at the dining room table. I felt like we were invading their privacy, but the pilot thought it fine and no problem.