Transcript: Here a Drone, There a Drone | Sep 23, 2014

Steve sits in the studio. He's slim, clean-shaven, in his fifties, with short curly brown hair. He's wearing a dark gray suit. Behind him, a wall screen reads “The Agenda, with Steve Paikin.”
He sits at a table in a television studio with three men and a woman.

Steve says WE'VE HEARD WHAT DRONES CAN
BRING US, BUT FLYING CAMERAS
ALSO POSE SERIOUS PRIVACY AND
SAFETY CONCERNS THAT WILL
REQUIRE NEW REGULATIONS AND
POLICIES TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.
BUT IT'S NOT ALL DOOM AND GLOOM.
DRONES MAY HAVE A VERY
CONSTRUCTIVE ROLE TO PLAY IN OUR
FUTURE AS WELL.
JOINING US NOW TO TELL US MORE:
ONTARIO'S FORMER PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER ANN CAVOUKIAN, NOW
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE
INSTITUTE FOR PRIVACY AND BIG
DATA AT RYERSON UNIVERSITY;

Ann is in her fifties. She has shoulder-length brown hair, and is wearing a red blazer.

Steve continues DAVE KROETSCH, CO-FOUNDER AND
CEO, AERYON LABS IN WATERLOO;

Dave is in his late thirties; he is clean-shaven, has short brown hair, and is wearing a gray suit.

Steve continues IAN HANNAH, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
FOR INDUSTRIAL SKYWORKS;

Ian is in his late forties; he is clean-shaven, has short gray hair, and is wearing a light blue shirt under a blue sweater.

Steve continues AND WE WELCOME BACK TECHNOLOGY
CONSULTANT JESSE HIRSH.

Jesse is in his thirties; he is clean-shaven, has short blond hair, and is wearing a dark brown suit.

Steve continues IT'S GOOD TO HAVE EVERYBODY
AROUND OUR TABLE TODAY HERE IN
LEASIDE, ONTARIO.
WE WILL GET TO THE ORWELLIAN
DOOM AND GLOOM BUSINESS I KNOW
YOU ALL WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
HOWEVER, LET'S JUST SET UP THIS
POTENTIALLY MORE CONSTRUCTIVE
LOOK AT OUR FUTURE, AND TO DO
THAT, HERE'S THE CEO OF MATTER
NET.
WATCH THE MONITORS IN THE
STUDIO.
WE HAVE A CLIP.
ROLL TAPE.

A clip plays on screen. It shows a man talking to a large audience.
A caption reads “Andreas Raptopoulos. No roads? There’s a drone for that.”

Andreas says IMAGINE 1 BILLION PEOPLE
BEING CONNECTED TO PHYSICAL
GOODS IN THE SAME WAY THAT
MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CONNECTED THEM TO INFORMATION.
IMAGINE IF THE NEXT BIG NETWORK
WE BUILD IN THE WORLD WAS A
NETWORK FOR THE TRANSPORTATION
OF MATTER.
IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD, WE HOPE
TO REACH MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WITH
BETTER ACCESS, GIVE THEM BETTER
MEDICATION AND BATTLE HIV-AIDS
AND OTHER EPIDEMICS.
OVER TIME WE HOPE IT WILL BECOME
A PLATFORM FOR ECONOMIC
TRANSACTIONS, LIFTING MILLIONS
OF PEOPLE OUT OF POVERTY.

Steve says SO THAT'S A RATHER
DIFFERENT AND RATHER
CONSTRUCTIVE, RATHER MORE
CONSTRUCTIVE VIEW, OF WHAT
DRONES CAN DO IN THE FUTURE.
YOU MAKE THEM, RIGHT?

Dave says THAT'S RIGHT.

A caption reads “Here a Drone, There a Drone. Look, up in the sky!”

Steve says I WANT TO FIND OUT
WHAT YOU, WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED
MAKING THEM, THOUGHT YOUR MARKET
WOULD BE.

Dave says WHEN WE FOUNDED THE COMPANY
WE WANTED TO FIND A WAY TO BRING
TECHNOLOGY REALLY YOU'VE ONLY
SEEN IN THE LAB OR UNIVERSITY TO
THE BATTLEFIELD WHAT WE SAW AS
AN EMERGING MARKET IN THE
COMMERCIAL WORLD.
WE SAW EVERYTHING FROM PRECISION
AGRICULTURE THROUGH TO SURVEYING
AND POLICE WORK AS A BRAND NEW
OPPORTUNITY THAT WAS UNCAPTURED.
SO IN TALKING TO USERS, THE BIG
CHALLENGE WAS THE SYSTEMS HAD TO
BE EASY TO USE.
THERE'S BEEN A HOBBY COMMUNITY
OUT THERE FOR YEARS USING REMOTE
CONTROL SYSTEMS.
THAT'S GOT TO CHANGE IN ORDER
FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON TO PICK
THIS UP AND USE IT AS A TOOL
INSTEAD OF A TOY.

Steve asks THE DRONES YOU MAKE
ARE HOW BIG.

Dave says WE HAVE A 3-POUND AND
5-POUND VERSION.
IT'S FOR THE BACKPACK, TRUNK OF
THE POLICE CAR.

Steve asks THEY SELL FOR WHAT?

Dave says BETWEEN 50 AND 200,000 DOLLARS.

Steve asks ARE YOU MAKING A
LIVING?

Dave says YEAH.
RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME.

Steve says IAN, YOU FLEW ONE OF
THESE THINGS.

Ian says YES.

A caption reads “Ian Hannah. Professional Society of Drone Journalists.”

Steve asks UNDER WHAT
CIRCUMSTANCES?

Ian Hannah says WE HAVE VARIOUS
OPERATIONS WITH THEM BUT OUR
MAIN OPERATION WITH THESE KIND
OF DRONES RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY
IN ROOF INSPECTIONS.

Steve asks WHICH?

Ian says ROOF
INSPECTIONS.
SO LARGE COMMERCIAL ROOFS
REQUIRE AN INSPECTION.
THEY GET WATER, THEY LEAK.
USING A DRONE, WE CAN ACTUALLY
SCAN THAT ROOF VERY, VERY
QUICKLY, DETERMINE IF THERE ARE
ANY ANOMALIES IN THE ROOF, IF
THERE ARE ANY KIND OF WET AREAS.
PRESENTLY I HAVE TO SEND PEOPLE
UP IN THE DARK TO WALK ON THESE
ROOFS TO FIND THIS KIND OF
STUFF.
WE DERISK THE PROJECT.
WE TAKE PEOPLE OFF THE ROOF.
WE SEND THE DRONE UP QUICKLY.
WE CAN ASCERTAIN IF THE ROOF
NEEDS REPLACING.

Steve asks DO YOUR DRONES LOOK
LIKE HIS DRONES?

Ian says THEY ARE HIS DRONES

Steve says I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A YES.

Ian says YES, EXACTLY.

Steve says YOU HAVE CONNECTION
TO THE POLAR SEA DOCUMENTARY WE
HAVE ON TVO COMING UP IN
DECEMBER.

Ian says THAT'S CORRECT.

Steve says TELL US WHAT ROLE
THEY PLAYED IN THAT.

Ian says THE POLAR SEA
WAS AN INTERESTING PROJECT.
WE WERE DOING THE 360-DEGREE
VIDEO OF THE ARCTIC.
WE DECIDED TO TAKE SOME DRONES
WITH US AND PUT THE CAMERA
SYSTEMS ACTUALLY ON THE DRONE TO
FLY THEM OVER, YOU KNOW, THINGS
THAT HADN'T BEEN FLOWN OVER
BEFORE.
THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES AS YOU
GET FURTHER NORTH.
DRONES AND COMPASSES ARE NOT
BEST FRIENDS.
WE DID HAVE SOME ISSUES.
WE DID GET AMAZING FOOTAGE OVER
AREAS IN GREENLAND.
IF YOU GO TO THE WEBSITE YOU'LL
SEE THE DRONES THEMSELVES FLYING
NICELY OVER THE GLACIER AND BE
ABLE TO LOOK AROUND COMPLETE
360°.
TECHNOLOGY USING DRONES AND 360
VIDEO.
SO IT'S TURNED OUT TO BE -- IT'S
STILL I THINK NOT OUT YET.
WHAT WE'VE SEEN OF IT SO FAR
LOOKS SPECTACULAR.

Steve says POLAR SEA, DECEMBER,
TVO.
EVERYBODY WATCH IT.

Ian says TRUST ME, THE
WEBSITE -- 360 IS NOT -- 360 IS
THE TECHNOLOGY.

Steve says WE HEARD A REFERENCE
TO AGRICULTURE EARLIER, JESSE.
FILL THAT BLANK IN.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

A caption reads “Jesse Hirsh. Metaviews Media Management.”

Jesse says IT'S ANOTHER
HUGE AREA IN WHICH DRONES I
THINK HAVE INTERESTING
COMMERCIAL APPLICATION.
THERE'S A COMPANY CALLED
PRECISION HAWK WHICH, WHILE
BASED IN NORTH CAROLINA,
ACTUALLY HAS ITS ROOTS AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO AND
HAMILTON'S BOB YOUNG IS ONE OF
THE MAJOR INVESTORS.

Steve says OWNER OF THE
TI-CATS.

Jesse says INDEED.
THEY PRODUCE AN INTERESTING
DRONE THAT KIND OF RESEMBLES A
PAPER AIRPLANE ALTHOUGH LARGER.
IT'S NOT LIKE A QUAD THAT GOES
STRAIGHT UP.
YOU SORT OF TOSS IT LIKE AN
AIRPLANE AND IT THEN GOES OVER
THE FIELDS OF YOUR FARM AND HAS
BOTH SENSORS AND SOFTWARE THAT
CAN BOTH MAP OUT THE FIELD IN
TERMS OF MONITORING GROWTH,
LOOKING FOR PESTS.
THE IDEA IS IT ALLOWS A MORE
SURGICAL APPLICATION OF
PESTICIDES, A MORE INTELLIGENT
WAY OF MANAGING YOUR FIELD AND
HAS BECOME QUITE POPULAR FOR
FARMERS AS ANOTHER WAY OF CROP
MANAGEMENT IN WHICH LITERALLY
THEY CAN DO THIS TYPE OF
ANALYSIS BY GOING TO THE AIR
RATHER THAN HAVING TO GO THROUGH
ALL THEIR FIELDS PHYSICALLY.

Steve says SO THIS SOUNDS
GREAT.
WHICH IS WHY WE BRING THE FORMER
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER IN RIGHT NOW TO
TELL US ABOUT THE CONCERNS THAT
YOU HAVE LEARNED ABOUT IN THE --
HOW MANY YEARS DID YOU DO THAT
JOB?

Ann says OVER 20
YEARS.

Steve says TWENTY YEARS AS THE
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER.
NOW IN YOUR GIG AT RYERSON
UNIVERSITY.
SO WHAT CONCERNS YOU ABOUT ALL
OF THIS?

A caption reads “Ann Cavoukian. Ryerson University.”

Ann says STEVE, IT'S
NOT AN EITHER-OR PROPOSITION.
THIS IS WHAT BOTHERS ME.
NEW TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPS AND IT'S
FABULOUS.
PEOPLE SAY IT'S WONDERFUL.
LOOK AT ALL THE WONDERFUL
PURPOSES IT SERVES.
I GUESS WE HAVE TO SAY GOOD-BYE
TO PRIVACY.
YOU CAN DO BOTH.
YOU CAN POTENTIALLY ENGAGE IN
SURVEILLANCE WITHIN YOUR HOME.
YOUR HOME IS YOUR CASTLE.
IT'S THE LAST BASTION OF
PRIVACY.
HOW IS IT THESE DRONES CAN
CAPTURE DATA IN THE WINDOW OF
YOUR HOUSE, POTENTIALLY YOUR
BEDROOM.
THERE WAS A CASE LIKE THAT IN
SEATTLE.
A WOMAN COMPLAINED.
HERE'S A DRONE BY MY BEDROOM
WINDOW.
SHE LOOKS OUT THE WINDOW AND A
GENTLEMAN IS ON THE STREET AND
HE SAYS, LOOK, LADY, I'M ON
PUBLIC PROPERTY.
I'M NOT ON YOUR PERSONAL
PROPERTY.
THERE'S NO ISSUE HERE.
THE HELL THERE ISN'T.
THERE'S A BIG ISSUE.
YOU ARE ENGAGING IN DOMESTIC
SURVEILLANCE AND THAT'S THE
ISSUE.
WE HAVE TO DEVELOP SYSTEMS,
POLICIES, AND LAWS THAT ENSURE
THAT ALL THE WONDERFUL USES OF
THE DRONES THAT YOU OUTLINED ARE
PERMITTED, BUT THEY DON'T
TRESPASS ON TO PEOPLE'S
ACTIVITIES, BEHAVIOUR OR
PRIVACY.

Steve says THAT EXAMPLE YOU
JUST GAVE FROM SEATTLE, NO LAWS
WERE BROKEN THERE AS THAT GUY ON
THE STREET, STANDING ON PUBLIC
PROPERTY, WAS SPYING ON HIS
NEIGHBOUR.

Ann says BECAUSE
THESE ARE NEW AREAS.
THE LAWS I'M SURE WILL EVOLVE,
AS WILL OUR ABILITY TO ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE.
BUT JUST TEN DAYS AGO IN THE
U.S., THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
DID A TALK ON DRONES.
SHE SAYS WE HAVE ENORMOUS
ISSUES.
WE HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT
PRIVACY AND DOMESTIC
SURVEILLANCE POTENTIAL FOR THESE
UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES,
DRONES.
WE NEED TO ALERT PEOPLE THAT
THERE ARE LOTS OF WONDERFUL
USES, I APPLAUD THEM.
BUT HERE'S WHERE IT STOPS AND
HERE'S WHERE IT CANNOT GO.
THE AREA OF DOMESTIC
SURVEILLANCE IN THE U.S., 36
STATES HAVE ALREADY INTRODUCED
LEGISLATION TO PROHIBIT THE USE
OF DRONES FOR PURPOSES OF
DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE ABSENT A
WARRANT.
13 OF THOSE STATES HAVE ALREADY
ENACTED THAT LEGISLATION.

Steve says IAN, FAIR TO SAY --
WE'RE ALREADY SEEING THIS KIND
OF STUFF AT -- WHAT WAS IT?
TINA TURNER'S WEDDING, I THINK,
PAPARAZZI HAD THE DRONES GOING
OVERHEAD TO SPY ON THINGS THEY
WEREN'T INVITED TO.
DOES THAT POSE ANY CONCERNS FOR
YOU?

Ian says AS YOU PROBABLY
KNOW, I ALSO REPRESENT THE
PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY OF DRONE
JOURNALISTS.

Steve says SAY THAT AGAIN.
I CAN'T IMAGINE PEOPLE KNOW THAT
EXISTS.

Ian says IT'S AN
ORGANIZATION THAT WE HAVE SET UP
TO REALLY KIND OF HELP
JOURNALISTS THROUGH SOME OF
THESE ISSUES.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY SOME PRIVACY
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED.
CONCERNS WITH PAPARAZZI USING
DRONES INAPPROPRIATELY.
THAT'S NOT THE ROLE OF OUR
ORGANIZATION IS TO STEER PEOPLE
AWAY FROM THAT AND GIVE THEM A
SOLID UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THIS
TECHNOLOGY CAN DO.
IT ABSOLUTELY DOES CONCERN ME
WHEN PAPARAZZI -- PROBABLY
EVERYONE'S LEAST FAVOURITE SORT
OF MEDIA AND THEY HAVE THE
PERFECT TOOL NOW TO GO OUT AND
SPY AND BE INVASIVE OF PEOPLE.
IT DOES CONCERN ME MASSIVELY.
THE OTHER QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU
REGULATE THAT?
HOW DO YOU STOP THAT?
I THINK PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING
THEMSELVES THAT ABOUT PAPARAZZI
FOR 100 YEARS AND THE PAPARAZZI
KEEPS FINDING WAYS OF GETTING
AROUND IT.
THIS TOOL WILL BE EQUALLY AS
HARD TO DEAL WITH THEM.
NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T TRY OR
BE PUTTING REGULATION OR SOME
LAWS IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT
TRY NOT TO HAPPEN BUT WE ARE
FACING A VERY DETERMINED GROUP
OF PEOPLE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING OF
PAPARAZZI.
THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO -- I
SHOULD POINT OUT TO OTHER
JOURNALISTS USING THIS
TECHNOLOGY IN A VERY APPROPRIATE
WAY FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD, FOR
DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.

Steve says SURE.
BUT LET ME QUOTE CELEBRITY
PHOTOGRAPHER CHARLES HARRISON
WHO SAID IN THE L.A. TIMES THE
OTHER DAY:

A quote appears on screen, and Steve reads it.

Steve says THERE ARE CERTAIN LINES THAT
PAPARAZZI SHOULDN’T CRPSS, AND I FEEL
THAT THE USE OF DRONES TO
PHOTOGRAPH CELEBRITIES MORE THAN
CROSSES THAT LINE.

Steve adds
WHAT DO YOU THINK, JESSE?

Jesse says IT STRIKES ME
WHEN ANN WAS DESCRIBING THE
SCENARIO OF SOMEONE COMING INTO
YOUR HOUSE VIA DRONE, I THOUGHT
OF THE GLASS TOWERS HERE IN
TORONTO AND HOW A LOT OF THESE
TOWERS WERE DESIGNED WITH THE
IDEA THAT NO ONE CAN SEE IN AT
20 STOREYS, 30 STOREYS.
SO IT'S A DIFFERENT SENSE OF
PUBLICNESS, ALONG WITH OUR
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.
SO FOR A DRONE TO FLY UP AND BE
ABLE TO REALLY SEE INTO AN URBAN
DESIGN THAT DID NOT ANTICIPATE
DRONES REALLY DOES SUGGEST THAT
THERE ARE DYNAMICS TO WHICH, ON
THE ONE HAND, WE'RE BUILDING
GLASS CONDOS THAT ASSUME NO ONE
CAN SEE IN AND YET THE
TECHNOLOGY TO SEE IN IS ALL OF A
SUDDEN BECOMING CHEAPER AND MORE
AFFORDABLE.
SO I THINK PART OF IT IS LAWS.
PART OF IT IS CULTURE.
IF YOU'RE ON THE SUBWAY AND YOU
TAKE OUT YOUR SMARTPHONE AND
TAKE A PHOTO OF SOMEONE, IT MAY
BE PUBLIC SPACE, BUT THE ISSUE
OF CONSENT COMES UP.

Steve asks THAT'S PROBLEMATIC,
ISN'T IT?

Jesse says IT'S ALMOST AS
IF WE NEED THAT SAME SENSE OF
CONSENT.
LEAVING YOUR DRAPES OPEN DOES
NOT MEAN THAT YOU CONSENT TO
HAVING SOMEONE SPY ON YOU.
SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT I THINK
WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS AS
THE TECHNOLOGY BECOMES EASIER TO
USE.

Steve asks DAVE, WHAT'S YOUR
VIEW?

Dave says YEAH, YOU KNOW, THE
REGULATIONS WILL ONLY STOP THE
PEOPLE THAT FOLLOW THE LAW,
RIGHT?
THINK ABOUT WHEN CAMERAS FIRST
WERE ADDED TO CELL PHONES,
RIGHT?
ALL OF THE PRIVACY CONCERNS THAT
CAME UP AT THAT TIME, THE LOCKER
ROOM PHOTOS AND WHATEVER ELSE.
AS A CULTURE WE'VE CHANGED.
MAYBE JUST DON'T BRING YOUR
PHONE OUT AND YOU'RE NOT FACING
SOMEONE IN THE LOCKER ROOM,
RIGHT?
THERE'S PROBABLY -- OR THERE
ALREADY ARE A HANDFUL OF
GUIDELINES THAT PEOPLE ARE
BREAKING IF YOU'RE FLYING
DOWNTOWN TORONTO WITH YOUR
DRONE, YOU'RE NOT OBEYING THE
MODEL AVIATION GUIDELINES WHEN
YOU'RE FLYING RECREATIONALLY,
FOR EXAMPLE.
THIS IS AN AREA THAT YOU
SHOULDN'T BE FLYING.
SO YOU'RE ALREADY BREAKING THOSE
GUIDELINES.
THE CHANCES OF YOU FOLLOWING
ANOTHER LAW IN THAT CASE AREN'T
PARTICULARLY HIGH.

Steve says WELL, DO WE NEED,
ANN, MORE LAWS ON THIS, GIVEN
THAT -- I MEAN, WE'RE RIGHT.
THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF THE LOCKER
ROOM.
NOBODY PULLS OUT A SMARTPHONE
AND TAKES A PICTURE IN A GYM
LOCKER ROOM.
THEY JUST KNOW THAT'S NOT THE
RIGHT THING TO DO.
DO WE NEED LAWS HERE?

Ann says THE REASON I
THINK YOU NEED SOME PROHIBITIONS
IN THE FORM OF LAWS,
REGULATIONS, IS PEOPLE WILL
USE -- THAT SEATTLE EXAMPLE.
PEOPLE USE CAMERAS TO INVADE
PEOPLE'S PRIVACY IN THEIR HOMES
WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY
UNACCEPTABLE.
I WAS TALKING TO IAN EARLIER.
THE USE OF THE DRONES TO LOOK AT
THE ROOF TOPS FOR VERY VALUABLE
PURPOSES AND HE WAS SAYING,
YEAH, BUT OFTEN THE ROOFTOPS ARE
AT THE TOP OF APARTMENT
BUILDINGS AND THEY HAVE TO GO UP
THE BUILDING AND THERE ARE
PEOPLE'S HOMES.
WE CAN DEVICE SYSTEMS WHERE YOU
COULD ALERT THE INDIVIDUALS, THE
DRONE IS NOT GOING TO BE
RECORDING ANYTHING UNTIL IT GETS
TO THE TOP.
DON'T CONCERN YOURSELF IF YOU
SEE IT OUTSIDE YOUR WINDOW.
THE DATA IS ONLY CAPTURED AT THE
TOP.
YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT THIRD
PARTY ATTEST TO THAT.

Steve asks DO YOU NEED A
REGULATION TO DEAL WITH THAT?

Ann says I THINK -- I
THINK DAVE'S RIGHT.
THE REGULATIONS WON'T MAKE
EVERYONE DO IT, OBVIOUSLY.
BUT IT SETS THE TONE OF WHAT IS
ACCEPTABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE.
IDEALLY YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO
HAVE A REGULATION, BUT THE
REALITY IS THAT SORT OF PUTS THE
LINE IN THE SAND AND IF YOU
CROSS THAT YOU HAVE SOME
CONSEQUENCES.
SO THIS WOULD JUST ASSIST THAT.
IDEALLY, I WOULD LIKE PROACTIVE
PROTECTIONS EMBEDDED INTO THESE
TECHNOLOGIES.

Steve asks MEANING WHAT?

Ann says SOMETHING
CALLED PRIVACY BY DESIGN.
IT'S ABOUT TRYING TO PREVENT
PRIVACY HARMS FROM ARISING.
IMAGINE EVENTUALLY IF YOU COULD
HAVE DRONES THAT COULD
SELF-INDICATE WE'RE NOT
CAPTURING YOUR INFORMATION,
WE'RE JUST GOING TO THE TOP.
THAT'S JUST ONE SIMPLE EXAMPLE.
BUT SOME WAY TO ALLAY PEOPLE'S
FEARS THAT -- THERE'S NO
INTENTION OF CAPTURING DATA IN
TERMS OF DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE
PURPOSES.
THIS CAMERA IS INTENDED TO
CAPTURE THE STUFF AT THE ROOF.
ONE SILLY EXAMPLE.
BUT THERE ARE WAYS TO DO THAT
AND IF WE SPENT TIME ON THIS,
I'M SURE WE COULD FIND A VARIETY
OF WAYS THAT YOU COULD TRY TO
MINIMIZE THE PRIVACY HARMS FROM
ARISING TO BEGIN WITH.

Steve asks DID I READ RIGHT.
HAVE YOU SOLD DRONES TO THE
HALTON REGIONAL POLICE?

Dave says THAT'S CORRECT.

Steve asks WHAT ARE THEY USING THEM FOR?

Dave says THEY ARE USING THEM FOR TRAFFIC
ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION IS
PROBABLY THE BIGGEST USES.
SEARCH AND RESCUE.
THERE ARE A TON OF APPLICATIONS.
WE HAVE OUR PRODUCTS ACTUALLY IN
USE WITH THE O.P.P. AND THEY'VE
TAKEN TRAFFIC ACCIDENT
RECONSTRUCTION FROM AN HOUR AND
A HALF SORT OF THE TYPICAL TIME
DOWN TO ABOUT TEN TO FIFTEEN
MINUTES.
SO THE 401 IS OPEN THAT MUCH
FASTER.

Ann says STEVE, IF I
COULD ADD, THE O.P.P. VERY
RESPECTFUL OF PRIVACY.
THEY TALKED TO MY FORMER OFFICE
ABOUT THE DRONES.
THEY REALLY WANT TO ENSURE THAT
THE PRIVACY IS EMBEDDED INTO THE
SYSTEM AND USED FOR AUTHORIZED
PURPOSES LIKE THE ONES YOU
MENTIONED.

Steve asks CAN I PUSH BACK ON
THAT A BIT?

Ann says YES.

Steve says O.P.P. USING DRONES
TO MONITOR PROTESTS IN EASTERN
ONTARIO ON A FIRST NATION.

Ann says THEY DIDN'T
MENTION THAT TO US.

Steve says YOU DON'T SAY?
WOULD YOU SAY THAT'S NOT KOSHER?

Ann says I WASN'T
AWARE OF THAT.
BUT THE POINT IS THAT -- SO
MAYBE YOU DO NEED, AT THE VERY
LEAST, A VERY STRONG POLICY.
WE DON'T HAVE THE LAWS YET.
BUT, YOU SEE, O.P.P. -- LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS VERY GOOD AT
FOLLOWING LAWS.
MAYBE YOU HAVE TO ENGAGE IN
REGULATION --

Dave says THERE HAVE BEEN
GUIDELINES FOR YEARS, EVER SINCE
AIRPLANES WERE INVENTED, IT HAS
BEEN IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER.
THE RULES AROUND WHAT'S
ADMISSIBLE, WHEN YOU NEED A
WARRANT, WHAT YOU CAN DO FROM
THE AIR IS WELL-ESTABLISHED.

Ann says WHEN YOU
HAVE A WARRANT FOR PURPOSES LIKE
THIS.
THAT SHOULD EXTEND TO THAT.

Jesse says THAT BRINGS UP
AN INTERESTING POINT AROUND HOW
THE DRONE COMMUNICATES TO ANYONE
WHO SEES IT IN THAT DRONES ARE
ALREADY USING WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION TO OPERATE, RIGHT?
THERE HAS TO BE A CONNECTION
BETWEEN THE OPERATOR AND THE
DRONE ITSELF.
SO WHY COULDN'T YOU HAVE, FOR
EXAMPLE, A REGULATION THAT SAYS:
DRONES MUST COMMUNICATE SAY VIA
WI-FI TO ANYONE WITHIN RANGE AS
TO ITS PURPOSE.
SO IT SAYS: I'M HERE TO SCAN
ROOFS.
OR I'M HERE TO CHECK CROPS.
OR I'M HERE TO RECONSTRUCT
TRAFFIC.
SO THAT JUST LIKE A WEBSITE HAS
TO HAVE A PRIVACY POLICY THAT
YOU CAN GO AND READ, PERHAPS
DRONES SHOULD BE WIRELESSLY
COMMUNICATING TO ANYONE WITHIN
RANGE EXACTLY WHAT THEIR PURPOSE
IS.
SO IF IT DIDN'T, YOU COULD
REPORT IT AND YOU COULD SAY
THERE WAS SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY IN
MY NEIGHBOURHOOD.
THE DRONE WAS NOT COMMUNICATING
WHAT WAS GOING ON.
YOU KNOW, YOU COULD ANSWER
WHETHER THE INDUSTRY WOULD DO
THAT ON ITS OWN, BUT THAT'S AN
EXAMPLE OF A REGULATION THAT
WOULD BE EASY TO COMPLY WITH.

Dave says AS AN EXAMPLE, THAT'S
NOT FAR OFF FROM WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN AVIATION GUIDELINES
THROUGH ACCESS TO AIRSPACE.
IF I'M A PILOT, MY CONCERN IS
RUNNING INTO A DRONE.
WE'VE HEARD OF STORIES OPERATING
OUTSIDE J.F.K. AIRPORT.
IN MY CASE, I'M ANOTHER PILOT
OPERATING IN THE AREA.
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT DRONES ARE
IN MY REGION, WHAT ALTITUDE ARE
THEY OPERATING AT SO I CAN AVOID
THEM.
IT'S NOT THAT DIFFERENT FROM
WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

Steve asks DO YOU THINK THERE'S
ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE POLICE
USING DRONES TO MONITOR
PROTESTS?

Ian says I THINK --
YEAH, THERE COULD BE A LOT OF
JUSTIFICATION.
PERHAPS IT'S SAFER THAN SENDING
THE POLICE UP IN A FULL-SIZED
HELICOPTER.
PERHAPS IT'S CHEAPER.
RIGHT NOW THEY CAN DO THAT.
THE QUESTION TO ASK: WOULD THERE
BE A DIFFERENCE FROM A JET
HANGING AROUND WITH
POLICEMEN HANGING OUT OF THE SIDE
TO A DRONE, IT’S A LOT CHEAPER
AND IS COSTING THE TAXPAYERS
A LOT LESS MONEY.

Steve says A LOT LESS INTRUSIVE
AND THREATENING PERHAPS AS WELL.

Ian says THERE'S THAT
TOO.
YOU CAN PUT A JET RANGER AT
2,000 FEET AND PICK OUT THE
COLOUR OF PEOPLE'S EYES.
DRONES ARE JUST DIFFERENT
VERSIONS OF A TECHNOLOGY, A
CAMERA THAT'S AIRBORNE.

Ann says YOU HAVE TO
BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT.
YOU HAVE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW IT'S
HAPPENING AND NOT TRY TO CONCEAL
IT.

Ian says THE CHALLENGE
IS UNDERSTANDING WHO IS
OPERATING THE DRONE.
AS AN OPERATOR, YOU CAN BE A
KILOMETRE AWAY.
YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW WHO IS
OPERATING IT.
THE FEAR MAYBE IS, I DON'T KNOW
WHO IS AND WHAT ARE THEY DOING?
IT'S A VALID QUESTION THAT WE --
YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAVE TO SORT
OF ADDRESS, BUT AGAIN THE
TECHNOLOGY PROBABLY ISN'T QUITE
THERE YET AND AS WE MOVE TOWARDS
THESE KIND OF QUESTIONS,
DRONE-MAKERS AND DRONE
TECHNOLOGIES WILL COME UP WITH
SOLUTIONS.

Jesse says I THINK
THERE'S A DIFFERENT CONTEXT,
THOUGH, IN THE CASE OF PROTESTS,
IN THAT HERE IN CANADA WE TEND
TO THINK OF DRONES AS COMMERCIAL
OR CIVILIAN, BUT DRONES HAVE A
MILITARY HISTORY TO THEM, AND
AMONGST ACTIVISTS THERE IS A
PERCEPTION OF THE MILITARY USE
OF DRONES.
SO I WOULD ALMOST IMAGINE THAT
IF YOU WERE AT A PROTEST AND YOU
SAW A DRONE IN THE SKY, IT WOULD
INCREASE TENSIONS.
IT WOULD EVOKE THE
MILITARIZATION OF POLICE.

Steve says TO THINK THAT DRONE
WAS THERE TO SHOOT YOU.

Jesse says OR YOU WOULD
JUST FEEL THAT IF SURVEILLANCE
ALONE WAS INTIMIDATING BECAUSE
CERTAINLY THE IDEA OF POLICE
SURVEILLING PROTESTERS IS A VERY
CONTENTIOUS POLITICAL ISSUE.
SO WHILE I AGREE, IF YOU CAN
CLEAR THE 400 OR THE 401 IN
GREAT TIME, THAT'S AN EXCELLENT
USE OF DRONES.
BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AN
OPEN ASSOCIATION, AN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT MANY PEOPLE
PERCEIVE DRONES AS MILITARY
HARDWARE, NOT SO MUCH
CIVILIAN --

Steve says I HAVE TO GET TO
DAVE ON THIS.
YOU'VE GOT SOME EXPERIENCE ON
THIS.

Dave says YEAH.
WE SELL OUR PRODUCTS TO
MILITARY, TO POLICE, AND TO
CIVILIAN USERS.

Steve says TALK TO US ABOUT
LIBYA, THOUGH.

Dave says SO, YOU KNOW,
ACTUALLY THROUGH THE CANADIAN
GOVERNMENT, WE WERE CONNECTED TO
THE -- I GUESS THE ACTING LIBYAN
EMBASSY OR ENVOY TO CANADA AND
HAD OUR SYSTEM DEPLOYED WITH THE
LIBYAN REBELS.
AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE,
AGAIN, THEY COULDN'T AFFORD
FULL-SIZED SYSTEMS, AND AGAIN,
WE DON'T ARM OUR SYSTEMS.
IT'S PURELY A RECONNAISSANCE
TOOL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, ABLE TO TRAIN
USERS ACROSS THE LANGUAGE
BARRIER AND IT'S DEPLOYED IN THE
NEXT DAY OR TWO.

Steve asks WHAT DID THEY USE
YOUR DRONES FOR IN LIBYA?

Dave says LOOKING ON THE OTHER
SIDE OF THE HILL TO SEE WHO IS
OVER THERE.
SORT OF SELF-DEFENCE.

Steve says THEY DID NOT ARM
THEM.

Dave says NO.

Steve asks COULD THEY BE ARMED?

Dave says A VERY SMALL -- NO.

Steve says UNDERSTOOD.
LET'S TALK ABOUT HOBBIES FOR A
SECOND.
WE STARTED WITH THIS EXAMPLE OF
SOMEBODY STANDING ON A PUBLIC
SIDEWALK AND THEN BASICALLY
HAVING THEIR WAY WITH THE
DRONES.
SHOULD THERE BE, IAN, A
REQUIREMENT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF
SPECIFIC LICENCE TO OPERATE A
DRONE IN APPROXIMATE SAME WAY IF
YOU WANT TO OPERATE A CAR YOU
HAVE TO HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENCE?

Ian says THAT'S A GOOD
QUESTION.
THEN THERE IS REGULATION AND I
THINK REGULATION IS STILL VERY
MISUNDERSTOOD BY A LOT OF
PEOPLE.
RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE IN THE
COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF A DRONE,
U.A.V., UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE,
TRANSPORT CANADA HAS A SET OF
REGULATIONS OF WHICH YOU HAVE TO
FOLLOW, YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT AN
APPLICATION FOR EVERY FLIGHT.
YOU KNOW, IT'S A TASK TO DO.
THOSE EXIST RIGHT NOW.
HOWEVER, FOR THE HOBBYIST
MARKET, TRANSPORT CANADA HAVE
REALLY BACKED OFF AND SAY WE
DON'T WANT TO REGULATE THE
HOBBYIST MARKET.
PEOPLE WHO HAVE GUIDELINES FOR
PEOPLE WHO OPERATE MODEL
AIRCRAFT AND HAVE FOR DECADES.
SO THERE ARE RULES IN PLACE.
THEY DO FEEL THAT THEY'RE KIND
OF YESTERDAY'S RULES FOR TODAY'S
PROBLEMS.
YOU KNOW, TRANSPORT IS TRYING TO
ADDRESS THIS.
THEY'RE COMING UP WITH NEW
REGULATIONS AND LICENSING WILL
BE PART OF THAT.

Steve says I SEE ANN SHAKING
HER HEAD HERE.

Ann says I DON'T
DISAGREE WITH YOU AT ALL, IAN,
BUT THOSE RULES ARE STILL IN
TERMS OF AVIATION-RELATED
ISSUES, I DON'T THINK THEY
EXTEND, NOT YET, TO THE
SURVEILLANCE -- THE POTENTIAL
FOR MASSIVE SURVEILLANCE.

Ian says I DON'T THINK
TRANSPORT CANADA WANTS TO BE
PART OF THAT.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY DO.

Ann says I DON'T
CARE --

Ian says THAT'S FAIR
ENOUGH.
AT THIS POINT THERE IS NO --
TRANSPORT AREN'T PRIVACY
EXPERTS, THEY'RE AVIATION
EXPERTS.
THEIR MAIN GOAL IS SAFETY.
SAFE OPERATION OF SOMETHING THAT
FLIES, WHETHER IT'S 2 INCHES OFF
THE GROUND OR 200 FEET OR
2,000 FEET.
THEY WANT TO KNOW.

Ann says WITH DUE
RESPECT, THEY CAN WORK WITH THE
OFFICE OF THE PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL
COMMISSIONER.
THEY HAVE WONDERFUL STAFF THERE
WHO COULD ASSIST THEM IN
DEVELOPING THAT.
THE FEAR IS, AND PEOPLE ALWAYS
SAY, THAT'S SO FAR OFF, THAT'S
NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.
THE NOTION OF A SURVEILLANCE
STATE.
THAT'S WHAT THREATENS OUR FREE
AND OPEN SOCIETY.
IF YOU GO OUT IN PUBLIC, IT'S
DIFFERENT FROM YOUR HOME.
WE ALL GET THAT.
PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE NOTION
THAT JUST BECAUSE I'M IN PUBLIC
THE POSSIBILITY OF ME BEING
TRACKED IS PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE.
WE HAVE TO HAVE AN OPEN DEBATE
ON THIS AND I THINK WE HAVE TO
HAVE SOME RULES ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS.
I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO BECOME
A SURVEILLANCE STATE AND THE
THREAT OF THAT IS LOOMING.
WE HAVE TO ADDRESS IT.

Steve asks SHOULD YOU NEED A
LICENCE AS A HOBBYIST TO OPERATE
A DRONE.

Jesse says I THINK YES.
AND I THINK PART OF THE REASON
IS THE SURVEILLANCE ISSUES.
I THINK PART OF IT IS FLYING A
DRONE OVER THE GARDINER MAY BE A
REALLY EASY THING TO DO BUT ALSO
RATHER STUPID THING TO DO, AND
I'VE SEEN IT, IN PART BECAUSE I
LIVE IN A CONDO BESIDE THE
GARDINER.

Steve asks YOU'VE SEEN DRONES
OVER THE GARDINER?

Jesse says ABSOLUTELY.

Steve asks DO YOU KNOW WHOSE
THEY ARE?

Jesse says I CAN SEE THE
OPERATOR BUT I DON'T KNOW HIS
NAME OR ADDRESS.

Steve says OR WHAT HE'S UP TO.

Jesse says THIS IS WHY NO
ONE I THINK WOULD JUMP ON A
MOTORCYCLE OR GET INTO A CAR
WITHOUT AT LEAST SOME LEVEL OF
DRIVER TRAINING, IF NOT PASSING
A DRIVER'S TEST.
I THINK IT'S TOTALLY REASONABLE
TO HAVE THE SAME THING FOR A
DRONE OPERATOR.
IT COULD BE A WEBSITE IN WHICH
THEY GO TO THE WEBSITE AND FILL
OUT A FORM AND PROVE THAT THEY
KNOW -- IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE
ONEROUS, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE
BUREAUCRATIC, BUT IT'S VERY
POWERFUL TECHNOLOGY AND I THINK
ASKING PEOPLE TO USE IT
RESPONSIBLY IS A PERFECTLY
LEGITIMATE SOCIAL CONTRACT.

Steve says DAVE?

Dave says THE FIRST TIME THAT A
DRONE CRASHES ON THE GARDINER
BECAUSE ANYTHING THAT FLIES WILL
CRASH.
IT'S JUST STATS, RIGHT?
WHAT GOES UP WILL COME DOWN.
IF THAT COMES DOWN ON THE
GARDINER AND, YOU KNOW, THERE
WILL BE BIG PROBLEMS AND THEN
ALL OF A SUDDEN THE RULES WILL
CHANGE AND THEY WILL CHANGE FAST
AND NOT IN A GOOD DIRECTION.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT FOR US IN THE INDUSTRY
WE ACTUALLY -- WE OFTEN REFRAIN
FROM USING THE WORD DRONE
BECAUSE OF CONNOTATIONS.
WE TRY AND WORK WITH OUR
OPERATORS TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE
OPERATING SAFELY BECAUSE, AGAIN,
TO BE IN FRONT OF IT, AND I
THINK THERE'S OPPORTUNITY ON THE
REGULATION SIDE TO GET IN FRONT
OF THE PRIVACY SIDE TOO.
AS IAN SAID, TRANSPORT CANADA
RUNS A PROCESS, THE SPECIAL
FLIGHT OPERATION CERTIFICATE
WITHIN CANADA.
INJECTING AN ELEMENT IN THERE
WHERE THEY ESSENTIALLY ASSESS
EACH OPERATION THAT YOU'RE
DOING -- OKAY, HOW DOES THAT
WORK WITH RESPECT TO PRIVACY?
THERE WILL BE LOCATIONS YOU CAN
OPERATE.
IF YOU'RE FLYING IN A PARK, AS
PEOPLE HAVE UNDER THE MODEL
AIRCRAFT GUIDELINES, YOU KNOW,
THE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU'D NEED
TO OPERATE THERE ARE VERY
DIFFERENT THAN THE REQUIREMENTS
YOU MIGHT NEED IF YOU'RE FILMING
IN DOWNTOWN TORONTO.

Steve says WHEN WE'RE
ACCUSTOMED TO SEE DRONES ON OUR
HIGHWAYS AND IT'S SECOND NATURE
AND NOBODY GETS EXCITED ABOUT
IT, BUT BEFORE WE'RE THERE,
WE'RE HERE.
MY HUNCH IS THAT PEOPLE SAW
DRONES FLYING OVER THE
HIGHWAY -- THAT COULD BE VERY
DISTRACTING AND CAUSE ACCIDENTS.
SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THAT?

Dave says THAT'S A CHALLENGE.
IT'S CULTURAL EDUCATION IS THE
SINGLE BIGGEST THING -- THE
FASTEST STEP TO TAKE, I THINK.

Ian says AS I SAY, YOU
GO ON YOUTUBE, YOU CAN GOOGLE
C.N. TOWER AND DRONES.
YOU'LL SEE ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE
VIDEOS OF GUYS FLYING DRONES
AROUND THE C.N. TOWER.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.
THEY'RE WITHIN A KILOMETRE OF
CITY CENTRE AIRPORT.
THEY'RE AT 2,000 FEET ALMOST
WITH THESE SYSTEMS.
IT IS AN EDUCATION THING AT THIS
POINT TO TELL THESE PEOPLE WHAT
YOU'RE DOING IS NOT ONLY, YOU
KNOW, STUPID, IT'S ALSO
DANGEROUS.
IT'S DANGEROUS TO THE PEOPLE ON
THE GROUND, IT'S DANGEROUS TO
THE PILOTS IN THE AIR.
THERE ARE SIGNALS GOING AROUND
THE CITY.

Steve says RADIO FREQUENCY.

Jesse says YOU LEFT AN
IMPORTANT PIECE OUT, THOUGH, AND
IT WAS SORT OF ALLUDED TO BY THE
VIDEO THAT STARTED OUR SEGMENT.
WE'RE ENTERING INTO A NEW ERA OF
THE INTERNET IN WHICH THESE
DRONES HAVE TO TALK TO EACH
OTHER.
IN FACT, WE NEED A NETWORK THAT
ALLOWS THE MACHINES TO
COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER.
THE CARS, THE PLANES, THE
HELICOPTERS, THE DRONES.
AND THERE WILL BE SUCH A NETWORK
PROBABLY RUN BY GOOGLE, BUT THE
IDEA IS, WHEN WE HAVE DRONES
FLYING OVER THE HIGHWAY, HOW DO
WE KNOW THEY'RE NOT GOING TO
CRASH BECAUSE THE DRONES WILL BE
TALKING TO EACH OTHER, TALKING
TO THE CARS, TALKING TO THE
SENSORS IN THE ROAD, AND THIS
INTERNET OF THINGS THAT WILL
ALLOW ALL THESE MACHINES IS PART
OF THE PRIVACY AND SAFETY
FRAMEWORK THAT REGULATES THIS,
BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW THE
TRANSITION UNTIL WE GET THERE.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT, HOW DO WE GET HUMANS TO
USE -- I'M THINKING, IT MIGHT
NOT BE HUMANS.
HUMANS WON'T MATTER.
IT'S HOW DO WE GET THE MACHINES
TO RESPECT EACH OTHER AND THE
MACHINES TO RESPECT THE LAW?

Steve says HUMOUR ME FOR A
SECOND.
I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT HUMANS
FOR A LITTLE WHILE LONGER HERE.
YOU HAD TO DEAL WITH POLITICIANS
DURING YOUR 20 YEARS AS
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER.
WHAT WAS YOUR SENSE ABOUT THEIR
LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE IN THIS AREA,
THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE LAWS IN
THIS AREA, THEIR UNDERSTANDING
OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE GET ALL OF
THIS?

Ann says I ALWAYS
THOUGHT THEY WERE VERY RECEPTIVE
WHEN YOU MADE IT REAL, MEANING
YOUR FAMILY, YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR
ACQUAINTANCES COULD BE CAPTURED
IN THIS WAY, AND, YOU KNOW,
STARTING WITH THE SURVEILLANCE
CAMERAS IN THE OLDEN DAYS,
MOVING FORWARD TO BIOMETRICS,
FACIAL FINGER RECOGNITION,
ET CETERA.
I THINK THEY GET IT WHEN YOU
TAKE THE TIME TO PRESENT IT TO
THEM IN A VERY ACCESSIBLE WAYS,
WHAT ARE THE REAL-LIFE
CONSEQUENCES AND HOW COULD THIS
IMPACT OUR SOCIETY?
WE HAVE SECTION 8 OF THE CHARTER
OF HUMAN RIGHTS -- CANADIAN
CHARTER, AND IT SAYS EVERYONE
SHOULD BE SECURE FROM
UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE.
HOW CAN IT RELATE TO THAT?
HOW COULD THAT IMPACT AND
NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR FREEDOMS?
THEY GET THAT AND THEY KNOW IF
YOU'RE POLLING THE PUBLIC,
THEY'RE GOING TO OBJECT TO IT.
EVERY TIME PEOPLE WANT FREEDOM.

Steve says GOTCHA.
LET ME READ THIS TO YOU.
THIS IS FROM TRANSPORT CANADA'S
I GUESS EQUIVALENT IN THE UNITED
STATES.
IT'S THE FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION.
THEY HAVE THIS ADVISORY
CIRCULATION.
THIS IS 30 YEARS OLD.

A caption appears on screen, and Steve reads it.

Steve says FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT OPERATING STANDARDS
YOU HAVE TO SELECT AN OPERATING SITE
THAT IS OF SUFFICIENT DISTANCE FROM
POPULATED AREAS.
YOU HAVE TO GIVE RIGHT OF WAY TO,
AND AVOID FLYING IN THE PROXIMITY OF,
FULL-SCALE AIRCRAFT. USE OBSERVERS
TO HELP IF POSSIBLE.
I MEAN, THIS SEEMS
LIKE PRETTY -- THIS SEEMS LIKE
PRETTY COMMON SENSE STUFF, BUT
THESE REGULATIONS ARE MORE THAN
30 YEARS OLD NOW.
DO WE HAVE A PROBLEM HERE?

Dave says I THINK IT'S A CASE
WHERE TECHNOLOGY HAS OUTPACED
REGULATIONS AND THAT OFTEN
HAPPENS, RIGHT?
TECHNOLOGY IS MOVING AT THE
SPEED OF BUSINESS, WHICH IS
OFTEN VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE
SPEED OF POLITICS.
YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SEEING A
PROLIFERATION OF U.A.V.s AND
DRONES BECAUSE THE COST HAS COME
DOWN SO MUCH.
WHEN A DRONE WAS A MILLION
DOLLARS, THIS WASN'T AN ISSUE TO
ANYONE.
IT WAS A VERY DIFFERENT PROBLEM.
NOW THAT YOU CAN GO TO YOUR
LOCAL, YOU KNOW, COMPUTER STORE
AND BUY SOMETHING FOR A FEW
HUNDRED BUCKS, IT DRAMATICALLY
CHANGED THINGS TO THE POINT
WHERE YOU WERE FLYING AN
AIRCRAFT THAT WAS MUCH BIGGER --
YOU COULDN'T FLY IT DOWNTOWN
BECAUSE IT COULDN'T TAKE OFF.
IT HAD A GAS ENGINE AND A
FIVE-FOOT WINGSPAN.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FLY THAT
DOWN YONGE STREET.
THE FACT THAT YOU PULL SOMETHING
OUT OF YOUR POCKET OR BACKPACK
AND IT'S A FEW HUNDRED
DOLLARS --

Ann says THAT IS
BEING UPDATED.
IN 2015 THE PART APPLICABLE TO
BE DRONES WILL BE COMING OUT.
EVEN WITH THE REVISED VERSION,
IT REMAINS UNANSWERED THE
SURVEILLANCE QUESTIONS.
THE F.A.A. DEALS WITH AVIATION
MATTERS, THEY DON'T DEAL WITH
SURVEILLANCE ISSUES.
HOW DOES THIS IMPACT THE PUBLIC?
THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED 36 STATES
HAVE ENACT THE SEPARATE
LEGISLATION ADDRESSING THE USE
OF DRONES OR UAVs FOR PURPOSES
OF DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE AND
SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED IT
ABSENT A COURT ORDER OR WARRANT.
YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF CHANGES
HAPPENING.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT POLLS ON THIS
IN THE UNITED STATES, EVERYONE
IS OPPOSED TO ANY USE OF DRONES
FOR PURPOSES OF DOMESTIC
SURVEILLANCE.
THEY LIKE IT -- YOU KNOW, YOU GO
TO ANOTHER COUNTRY YOU DO IT,
YOU DO IT FOR SAFETY PURPOSES,
SEARCH AND RESCUE, ALL THE GOOD
REASONS YOU IDENTIFY.
BUT FOR PURPOSES OF SURVEILLANCE
OF PEOPLE, THEY SAY NO.

Ian says WHAT'S
INTERESTING ON THAT SIDE, YOU
KNOW, SEATTLE, THE REVERSE OF
THAT HAPPENED ALSO IN THE U.S.
A GUY WAS FLYING A DRONE ALONG A
BEACH JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF
MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS.
SOMEBODY CAME UP TO HIM AND
ATTACKED HIM, PHYSICALLY BEAT
THIS GUY UP BECAUSE THEY WERE
SPYING -- HE WAS SPYING ON THEM.
HE WAS COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW,
DOING HIS OWN BUSINESS, NOTHING
ILLEGAL, HE WAS JUST DOING IT
FOR FUN.
HE ACTUALLY GOT ATTACKED BY A
WOMAN WHO SAID SHE WAS BEING
SPIED ON BY HIS DRONE.
THERE'S ALSO A KNEE-JERK
REACTION A LITTLE BIT WHEN A
DRONE COMES NO PLAY.
MUST BE DOING SOMETHING
BAD.

Steve says YOU GET THAT, I
PRESUME.
THAT'S A NATURAL INFERENCE.

Ian says IT CAN BE.
I THINK AS THE TECHNOLOGY GETS
ADAPTED, I THINK IN TEN YEARS'
TIME, PEOPLE WON'T BE TALKING
THIS WAY.

Ann says OBVIOUSLY I
DON'T THINK THE GUY SHOULD HAVE
BEEN BEATEN UP.
BUT WHEN I SEE A DRONE, THE
NATURAL REACTION IS WHAT IS THAT
DOING?
YOU'RE ON A BEACH FOR LEISURE
PURPOSES.
YOU'RE NOT THERE TO HAVE
SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS.

Jesse says OUR SENSE OF
PUBLICNESS IS CHANGING.
THAT WE STILL THINK OF THIS IDEA
THAT THE PUBLIC IS THE TOWN
SQUARE WHERE EVERYBODY IS ABLE
TO SAY WHAT THEY ARE.
BUT, NO, WE'RE IN PUBLIC WHEN WE
DON'T REALIZE WE'RE IN PUBLIC.
WHEN WE'RE ON THE BEACH, WE WANT
TO BE ABLE TO WEAR A SWIM SUIT
WITHOUT APPEARING IN TMZ.
THAT'S WHY I THINK DRONES REALLY
EVOKE THAT CONFUSION, THEY EVOKE
THE MESSINESS OF OUR TIMES, THAT
WE ARE SIMULTANEOUS PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE.

Ian says I AGREE, IT
DOES EXACTLY THAT.
OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE ON A BEACH,
YOU'RE IN A PUBLIC SPOT, YOU
KNOW, THERE'S CAMERA CREWS DOING
GOD KNOWS WHAT, A DOCUMENTARY --

Steve asks THERE'S AN
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY EVEN WHEN
YOU'RE IN PUBLIC, RIGHT?

Ann says ESPECIALLY
IN A BATHING SUIT.
A LOT OF US DON'T WANT TO
REVEAL --

Ian says YOU KNOW, WE'RE
IN PUBLIC SPACES.
THERE IS A LIMITED EXPECTATION
OF PRIVACY, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT
SAY THERE'S NO EXPECTATION OF
PRIVACY, YOU'RE IN PUBLIC,
WALKING DOWN THE STREET.

Ann says I WOULD
HAPPILY TAKE THIS TO A POLL ON
WHAT PEOPLE'S EXPECTATIONS WOULD
BE LYING ON A BEACH IN THEIR
BATHING SUIT.
WOULD THEY EXPECT ANYTHING LIKE
THAT?
I WOULD DEBATE THAT.

Ian says PEOPLE TAKING
HOLIDAY PICTURES ALL THE TIME
WITH THEIR CELL PHONES.

Jesse says AT YONGE AND
DUNDAS SQUARE DOES NOT
NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU'RE
PUBLIC.
I DISAGREE.
I THINK THAT THERE'S A
GENERATION THAT'S GROWING UP IN
DIGITAL SPACES THAT THEY SEE AS
PRIVATE AND WHEN THEY ARE IN
PUBLIC AND IF THEY ARE LOOKING
INTO THEIR PHONE, IF THEY ARE
HANGING WITH THEIR FRIENDS,
THEY'RE IN PRIVATE.
AND IF YOU TAKE A PHOTO OF THEM,
YOU'RE VIOLATING THEIR CONSENT,
YOU'RE VIOLATING THEIR PRIVACY,
THEY DIDN'T GIVE YOU PERMISSION
TO TAKE A PHOTO.
I'M NOW IN THE PUBLIC HERE ON
PUBLIC TELEVISION, BUT I SIGNED
A RELEASE FORM THAT GAVE TVO THE
PERMISSION TO FILM ME HERE IN
THE PUBLIC.

Ian says FAIR ENOUGH.
YOU'RE TALKING A GENERATION THAT
ARE POSTING EVERYTHING ON
FACEBOOK.
I'M NOT SURE I 100 PERCENT
AGREE --

Ann says THE RESEARCH
COMING OUT FROM THE UNIVERSITY
OF NEW YORK -- NEW YORK
UNIVERSITY, SHE IS SAYING AU
CONTRAIRE.
THE KIDS USING FACEBOOK HAVE A
MUCH STRONGER SENSE OF PRIVACY
THAN YOU EVER BELIEVED.
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT WAY OF
PROTECTING IT THAN YOU AND I
WOULD.
THERE'S AN ENORMOUS BELIEF IN
PRIVACY IN THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT
IS MISTAKENLY THOUGHT TO BE
GONE.
THAT'S NOT TRUE.

Dave says ANOTHER THING THAT
CAUSES DRONES TO EVOKE SUCH A
STRONG REACTION AND THAT IS THE
ALMOST ANONYMITY WITH IT.
IF YOU WERE STANDING THERE TAKING
A PICTURE OF YOUR FAMILY ON THE BEACH
YOU’RE STANDING THERE WITH A CAMERA
AN EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT THAT’S
YOUR FAMILY, YOU’RE TAKING A PICTURE
WITH THEM, WITH THEIR CONSENTING.
IF YOU WERE DOING IT FROM A MILE
DOWN THE BEACH MAYBE OF YOUR
FAMILY, NO ONE KNOWS THAT.

Steve says DIFFERENT SCENARIO.

Ian says THAT'S VERY
IMPORTANT.
I THINK THE ISSUE OF WHO IS
OPERATING THAT DRONE AND WHAT
THEY'RE DOING WITH IT IS A
CRITICAL DIFFERENCE.
ON A PUBLIC SPACE, PEOPLE CAN
WONDER WHAT'S GOING ON.
I THINK THAT HAS TO BE
ADDRESSED.
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE OPERATE, WE'RE
VERY VISIBLE.
OUR COMPANY CAR HAS BIG LOGOS,
WE'RE WEARING FLUORESCENT VESTS.
PAPARAZZI AND I DARE SAY OTHERS
MAY WANT TO HIDE WHAT THEY'RE
DOING.

Steve says IT'S INTERESTING.
THE EXPECTATION IS THAT BECAUSE
OUR KIDS PUT SO MUCH OF THEIR
LIVES ONLINE, WE THINK THEY
DON'T CARE ABOUT PRIVACY AT ALL,
BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S NOT THE
CASE AND THEY ACTUALLY WOULD
OBJECT IF SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD
TAKING PICTURES OF THEM ON THE
BEACH.

Ann says WHAT I'M
SAYING IS, IS THE RESEARCH
COMING OUT IN, SAY, THE LAST TEN
YEARS, ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST
FEW YEARS, IS THAT KIDS DEEPLY
CARE ABOUT THEIR PRIVACY.
KIDS DON'T HAVE ECONOMIC
INTERESTS LIKE ADULTS.
THEIR INTERESTS ARE DIFFERENT.
IT'S HIGHLY CONTEXTUAL.
FOR THESE KIDS AND THEY'VE BEEN
GROWING UP IN THE DIGITAL TIME,
THEY FIND ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT
WAYS OF PROTECTING THEIR PRIVACY
THAT WE WOULD NEVER EVEN THINK
OF.
THERE'S A KEEN DEEP INTEREST IN
PRIVACY IN THE KIDS.
IT IS REFLECTED PROBABLY IN
DIFFERENT WAYS THAN WE WOULD,
HIGHLY CONTEXTUAL, AND TO ME
THAT'S THE REFRESHING PART.
PEOPLE NEED MOMENTS OF PRIVACY
AND INTIMACY AS WELL AS
CONNECTING.
YOU NEED BOTH.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS MIND SET.

Jesse says WITH THE YOUNG
PEOPLE IT'S OBVIOUS.
THEY DON'T WANT THEIR PARENTS TO
KNOW WHAT THEY'RE UP TO.
IT'S PERFECTLY FINE IF THEIR
FRIENDS KNOW EVERY MOMENT OF
THEIR LIFE, BUT NOT MOM AND DAD.

Ian says 360 VIDEO IS
ANOTHER ISSUE OF PRIVACY.
PEOPLE SITTING IN PUBLIC AND --
GOOGLE OBVIOUSLY HAS THAT WITH
THE GOOGLE CAR.
AS THE GOOGLE CAR DRIVES DOWN
YOUR STREET, YOU CAN LOOK INTO
PEOPLE'S HOUSES.
THE RESOLUTION IS GETTING BETTER
WITH GOOGLE.
IS THAT AS INVASIVE AS A DRONE?

Ann says COUNTRIES LIKE GERMANY HAS
COMPLETELY OBJECTED TO THAT
THEY HAVE COMPLETELY SAID NO.

Steve says I SEE A FUTURE FOR A
ONE-WAY GLASS MANUFACTURER FOR
HOUSES, APARTMENT BUILDINGS,
CONDOS.
WE HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES LEFT.
JESSE, LET ME THROW THIS YOUR
WAY.
APPARENTLY PEOPLE IN YOUR WORLD
KNOW THIS PROFESSOR VERY WELL.
PROFESSOR IN THE HISTORY OF
TECHNOLOGY AT THE GEORGIA
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND
APPARENTLY HIS FIRST LAW OF
TECHNOLOGY SAYS: TECHNOLOGY IS
NEITHER GOOD NOR BAD NOR IS IT
NEUTRAL.
I NEED YOU TO EXPLAIN THAT TO US
AND TELL US HOW IT APPLIES TO
THIS CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING
TONIGHT.

Jesse says THE MEDIUM IS
THE MESSAGE IS I THINK EXACTLY
WHAT HE'S SAYING.
THE TOOL SHAPES THE TASK.
IF YOU HAVE A HAMMER YOU'RE
GOING TO LOOK FOR THINGS TO HIT.
IF YOU HAVE A CLOTH, YOU MAYBE
LOOK FOR THINGS TO WIPE.
I THINK THAT WAS THE POINT ANN
MADE ABOUT DRONES AND
SURVEILLANCE, THAT TRANSPORT
CANADA THINKS ABOUT
TRANSPORTATION.
F.A.A. THINKS ABOUT AVIATION.

Steve says NOT PRIVACY.

Jesse says IN FACT THEY
SHOULD BE THINKING
INTERDISCIPLINARY.
THE IDEA THAT TECHNOLOGY IS NOT
NEUTRAL, NOR IS IT GOOD, NOR IS
IT BAD, SAYS WE HAVE AGENCY.
WE CAN CHOOSE TO USE THIS
TECHNOLOGY IN VERY EMPOWERING
WAYS, BUT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS
GOING TO CHANGE US.
AND THAT THERE'S NO GOING
BACKWARDS.
AS SOON AS PEOPLE REALIZE THAT
THEY CAN SEE FROM ABOVE, WELL,
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SAY, OKAY,
I DON'T NEED IT ANYMORE.
SAME WAY IF A YOUNG PERSON JOINS
FACEBOOK, THEY HAVE LOTS OF
FRIENDS.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LEAVE EVEN
THOUGH THEY VALUE THEIR PRIVACY.
IT SUGGESTS WE'RE IN A ONE-WAY
DIRECTION FORWARD IN WHICH IF WE
DON'T BAKE IN PRIVACY BY DESIGN,
IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT TO,
AFTER THE FACT, REINTRODUCE A
CULTURE THAT RESPECTS PRIVACY.
SO IT'S IMPORTANT IN THIS
FORMATIVE ERA THAT WE THINK
ABOUT THE SOCIAL CONCERNS IN
ADDITION TO THE TECHNICAL
CONCERNS.

Steve asks ANN, YOU WANT THE
LAST 30 SECONDS TO WRAP THAT
THOUGHT UP?

Ann says I COULDN'T
AGREE MORE.
WE HAVE TO GET RID OF THE SILO
THINKING.
ONCE YOU GET RID OF THE SILOS
AND LOOK AT THE POTENTIAL HARMS
THAT COULD ARISE, WE CAN ADDRESS
THE ISSUE IN A PROACTIVE WAY,
IMPELLED THE NECESSARY
PROTECTIONS, PRIVACY BY DESIGN,
BUT THAT ALLOWS MULTIPLE
FUNCTIONALITIES TO WORK AT THE
SAME TIME.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DRONES.
I'M SAYING I WANT DRONES AND I
WANT PRIVACY.
IT'S NOT GET RID OF THE VERSES.
THIS SUM VIEW OF IT'S THIS OR
THIS.

Steve says WE CAN DO BOTH.

Ann says YOU HAVE TO
DO BOTH.

Steve says OKAY.
THAT'S WHERE WE LEAVE IT.
THANKS, EVERYBODY, FOR JOINING
US TONIGHT HERE AT TVO.
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

They all say THANK YOU.

Watch: Here a Drone, There a Drone