Well Dick you did photography ok from DIK for yr money making books and magazines and CAsA stayed away.
Why was that I wonder?...well I dont really, I heard the reasons years ago from some mealy mouthed, brain dead "investigator"(sic), when collecting invoices from my client stated .."this is not about safety, its about commerce"
"Dick Smith.?.yes we know all about him, but high profile, cashed up ...er, um.. would like to bust him but might not be a good career move." See...cowards as well !.
Which proves how the "rules" are applied. Different strokes for different folks..but thats the "safety" control freaks for ya.
Reg 206 re photography should be binned since the "commerce" of photography is post flight and there never has been a problem with the camera affecting the safety of the flight, the licence of the pilot and medical, and the following of the VFR rules.
And it is also the right of a photographer to take images from a public space ...the air, and earn a living. Reg 206 denies those civil rights.
Ditto 27 d ? allowing an aircraft to be used for a commercial purpose eg photography..
not an unsafe or reckless purpose...as you might expect from a ;safety' regulator...but a commercial purpose.!!
Seems like some RAA pilots are doing it.
But then I read that a Realtor taking pics with his drone for his own business benefit is told by CAsA to 'cease and desist' as he's acting commercially !!
No wonder the country is fcuked.
Regulatastan, where CAsA caliphate, is destroying individuals and businesses.
All in the name of "safety", of course.