Australia has regulated unmanned aircraft since 2002. The relevant regulations are being substantially revised in 2016, including new rules related to using remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) for nonrecreational purposes that come into force in September 2016. The new rules provide for commercial operations of very small RPA (weighing less than 2 kilograms/4.4 pounds) to be conducted without the need for a remote pilot license or operator’s certificate, provided that these are operated under the standard conditions established in the new regulations. Small RPA (2–25 kilograms/4.4–55 pounds) will also be able to operate over a person’s own land for certain purposes and under the standard conditions without the need for certification and a license, while the use of medium RPA (25–150 kilograms/55–330.7 pounds) for the same purposes and under the standard conditions will only require a remote pilot’s license. Operators of large RPA, as well as smaller RPA for other nonrecreational purposes, will still be required to obtain a remote pilot license and operator’s certificate. Large RPA must also have airworthiness certification.
To be eligible for a remote pilot license, operators must obtain certain qualifications, complete certain training, and have a minimum number of hours of experience flying RPA. Entities wishing to obtain an operator’s certificate to operate large RPA or smaller (nonexcluded) RPA for nonrecreational purposes must have the facilities, procedures, and personnel needed to operate the RPA safely.
There is currently some uncertainty with respect to the privacy rules applicable to the use of drone technology for collecting or recording information. In 2014, a parliamentary committee recommended a review of the relevant legislation, but no changes have been proposed to date.
The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) states that “Australia was the first country in the world to regulate remotely piloted aircraft, with the first operational regulation for unmanned aircraft in 2002.”  The current rules related to remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) and model aircraft are contained in Part 101 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth) (CASR). 
CASA is currently working to modernize the regulations and expects to complete a full rewrite by the end of 2016.  To achieve this, two “post-implementation review” projects have been initiated with respect to Part 101. 
A. US 14/18 – Review of Certain Aspects of Part 101
The objectives of this project include to review the provisions in the regulations related to model aircraft in terms of their “effectiveness in managing emerging risks associated with use of unmanned aircraft which fall outside the scope” of the provisions on large and commercially-used RPA, and to generally review all of Part 101 other than the large and commercially-used RPA provisions. 
B. OS 11/20 – Review of Regulations and Guidance Material Related to Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
The objective of this project is to “provide an up to date regulation and more comprehensive guidance to industry on the regulatory requirements and approval processes for the commercial operation of RPAS [remotely piloted aircraft systems] in Australia.”  It is being conducted in two phases. Phase 1 involves amendments to Part 101 of the CASR and the publication of a suite of advisory circulars to provide guidance to industry. The process included the development of a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which was released in 2014, with people able to submit comments on the proposed changes to Part 101. 
On March 24, 2016, an amending regulation, the Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 (Cth) (2016 Regulation), was promulgated.  The amendments will come into force on September 29, 2016.  CASA states that the amendments “reduce the cost and legal requirements for lower-risk remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) operations. More complex operational matters will be dealt with in a new manual of standards to be developed with industry, providing greater flexibility and responsiveness in this rapidly evolving area.” 
This report outlines the rules contained in Part 101, as amended by the 2016 Regulation.
Phase 2 of the project “will consist of a complete re-write of the regulation resulting in a new CASR Part 102 for RPAS.” 
II. CASR Part 101
There are currently three subparts in Part 101 of the CASR that specifically regulate different sizes and uses of RPA and model aircraft: Subpart 101.C contains provisions that are applicable to unmanned aircraft generally; Subpart 101.F, as amended by the 2016 Regulation, applies to the operation of “large” RPA and of “very small,” “small,” and “medium” RPA for purposes other than sport or recreation; and Subpart 101.G relates to model aircraft, which are only used for recreational purposes. Subpart 101.A also contains some preliminary provisions relevant to operating RPA, and Subpart 101.B includes a general prohibition on the unsafe operation of unmanned aircraft.
The 2016 Regulation will insert a new Subpart 101.AB that provides for the general authorization for people supporting the operation of model aircraft and RPA. As noted above, 2016 Regulation also provides for CASA to issue a “Manual of Standards” prescribing matters required or permitted by the regulations, or that are otherwise “necessary or convenient” to be prescribed in terms of giving effect to Part 101.  Other changes include the following: 
Changing the terminology relating to unmanned aircraft from “UAV” (unmanned aerial vehicle) to RPA, to align with that used by the International Civil Aviation Organization.
Creating new weight classifications for RPA, being “very small” (less than 2 kilograms/4.4 pounds), “small” (2–25 kilograms/4.4–55 pounds), “medium” (25–150 kilograms/55–330.7 pounds), and “large” (more than 150 kilograms/330.7 pounds). 
Introducing the concept of “excluded RPA,” which relates to RPA operations considered to be of lower risk, as determined by RPA category and operational use, and that will consequently have reduced regulatory requirements.
Establishing a set of standard RPA operating conditions, which must be complied with in order for certain operations to be considered excluded RPA operations.
Establishing a new system that allows very small RPA to be operated for commercial purposes without the need for prior certification or licensing, provided certain conditions are met.
The amendments prohibit autonomous flights “until such time as suitable regulations can be developed by CASA.” However, the explanatory statement accompanying the 2016 Regulation states that “there is scope for autonomous flight to be approved by CASA on a case-by-case basis in the meantime.” 
A. General Operating Rules: Subpart 101.C
Subpart 101.C applies to unmanned aircraft of all kinds, except control-line model aircraft and model aircraft flown indoors.  It provides that, in order to legally operate any unmanned aircraft, the following requirements must be met:
The aircraft may not be operated in or over a prohibited or restricted area, unless permission is obtained from the relevant authority controlling the area.
The aircraft may be operated at an altitude greater than 400 feet above ground level only in designated areas of controlled airspace and in accordance with air traffic control clearance.  Under the 2016 Regulation, the Manual of Standards “may prescribe requirements relating to the operation of unmanned aircraft in controlled airspace.” 
The aircraft must be operated within the operator’s visual line of site, unless approval is granted by the CASA 
The aircraft may only be operated at an altitude above 400 feet within three nautical miles of an airfield if permitted by the regulations or is otherwise granted by the relevant air traffic control service or by the CASA. 
The aircraft may also be operated above 400 feet in approved areas. 
A person must not cause any item to be dropped or discharged from the aircraft in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft, person, or property.
The aircraft must be operated in visual meteorological conditions, or in instrument meteorological conditions with appropriate approvals. 
B. Operating Large RPA and Operating Other RPA for Nonrecreational Purposes: Subpart 101.F
As noted above, Subpart 101.F (as amended) applies to the operation of very small, small, and medium RPA “other than for the purpose of sport or recreation,” and to the operation of any large RPA.  In many circumstances, the person actually operating such RPA must hold a “remote pilot license”  and the relevant entity must hold a certificate authorizing the operation (currently referred to as a UAV operator’s certificate or UOC).  Under the 2016 Regulation, these requirements will not apply if the operation involves an “excluded RPA.”
All operators of RPA covered by Subpart 101.F, other than those operating very small RPA, must also hold a “relevant qualification” related to the use of aeronautical radio, and must maintain a “listening watch” on a specified frequency or frequencies, as well as making required broadcasts at specified intervals.
In general, RPA must not be operated within 30 meters of a person “not directly associated with the operation” of the RPA.  The 2016 Regulation creates new exceptions to this rule, stating that it does not apply if the person is standing behind the RPA while it is taking off, or to very small, small, and medium RPA where the person has consented and the RPA is operated no closer than 15 meters to him or her. 
The amendments also provide for the Manual of Standards to prescribe requirements relating to the operation of RPA in certain areas. 
1. Excluded RPA
For the purposes of Subpart 101.F, the 2016 Regulation provides that “excluded RPA,” for which operators are not required to obtain the license and certification referred to above, include the following: 
A micro RPA, being an RPA with a gross weight of 100 grams or less. 
A very small RPA if it is being operated for the purpose of sport or recreation or in standard RPA operating conditions.
A small RPA if it is being operated by or on behalf of the owner of the RPA, over land that is owned or occupied by the owner of the RPA, in standard RPA operating conditions, and for certain listed purposes (such as aerial spotting or photography, agricultural operations, communications retransmission, carriage of cargo) for which no remuneration is received by anyone involved in the operation.
A medium RPA in accordance with the same terms as for a small RPA, above, except that the person operating the RPA must also have a remote pilot license.
A small or medium RPA being operated for the purpose of sport or recreation, or if it is being operated in standard RPA operating conditions by a person for the purpose of meeting the experience requirement for the grant of a remote pilot license, or by the holder of such a license for the purpose of getting practical experience and gaining competency in the operation of an RPA.
An RPA being operated for the purpose of receiving training from an RPA operator who holds an operator’s certificate.
2. Standard RPA Operating Conditions
The 2016 Regulations sets out the following as being the standard RPA operating conditions: 
The RPA is operated within the visual line of site of the operator.
The RPA is operated at or below 400 feet above ground level during the day.
The RPA is not operated within 30 meters of a person not associated with the operation of the RPA.
The RPA is not operated in a prohibited area, certain restricted areas, over a populous area, or within three nautical miles of the movement area of a controlled airfield.
The RPA is not operated over an area where a public safety or emergency operation is being conducted, unless approval is granted by the person in charge of the operation.
The person operating the RPA operates only that RPA.
3. Operating Large RPA
In addition to the requirements for a remote pilot’s license and operator’s certificate, large RPA may only be operated if the operator has been issued a special certificate of airworthiness or an experimental certificate.  Furthermore, large RPA can only be operated with the specific approval of CASA, which may impose certain conditions, such as requiring that the RPA stay within a specified area or prohibiting its operation at night. 
RPA for which a certificate of airworthiness has been issued must not be operated in a populous area “at a height less than the height from which, if any of its components fails, it would be able to clear the area,” unless granted approval from CASA.  Before granting such approval, CASA must be satisfied that the operator of the RPA “will take proper precautions to prevent the proposed flight being dangerous to people and property.”
The regulations also require that maintenance be carried out on large RPA in compliance with provisions in the Civil Aviation Rules 1988 (Cth) applicable to Class B aircraft. 
4. Operating Other RPA for Nonrecreational Purposes
The regulations state that a very small, small, or medium RPA used for a nonrecreational purpose may be operated outside of an approved area if it stays clear of populous areas and, if it is to be operated above a height of 400 feet, the operator has obtained CASA’s approval to do so.  Approval cannot be granted to operate such RPA “over a populous area at a height less than the height from which, if any of its components fails, it would be able to clear the area.”
As indicated above, unless it is an excluded RPA, persons operating an RPA for nonrecreational purposes must first obtain a remote pilot license and the relevant business must have an operator’s certificate. Excluded RPA include very small RPA operated in standard operating conditions.
The 2016 Regulation also inserts new provisions regarding the operation of very small RPA (i.e., weighing less than 2 kilograms/4.4 pounds) for “hire or reward,” which require an operator to notify CASA at least five business days before first conducting the operation.  Such operations, in order to avoid certification and licensing requirements, must still be conducted under the standard RPA operating conditions, including with respect to height, distance from people, and distance from controlled airfields. 
5. Remote Pilot Licenses
The regulations set out what must be included in an application for a remote pilot license and the eligibility criteria for granting a license. The eligibility criteria, as amended by the 2016 Regulation, require a person to have passed one of certain types of examinations or components of training courses related to aviation theory or aeronautical knowledge, to have completed one of certain types of training courses related to the operation of the RPA that he or she proposes to operate, and to have at least five hours experience in operating an RPA under standard RPA operating conditions. 
Remote pilot licenses may be subject to conditions related to the type of RPA that a license holder may operate and the areas where he or she may operate RPA, or requiring that he or she only operate RPA in visual meteorological conditions.  The 2016 Regulation sets out particular conditions that must apply to the licenses, which relate to additional requirements for certain qualifications in order for the license holder to operate RPA in particular ways, such as above 400 feet in controlled airspace or outside of his or her visual line of sight. 
6. RPA Operator’s Certificate
The regulations also set out the requirements for applications for certification as an RPA operator and the eligibility criteria for granting certification. The eligibility criteria require the operator to show that the company or other legal entity has
“an organisation and structure that is appropriate for safe operation of RPA”;
“enough qualified and experienced personnel to undertake the proposed operations safely”;
“facilities and equipment appropriate to carry out the proposed operations using [RPA] of the type to be used”;
“suitable documented practices and procedures to do so, including practices and procedures for the maintenance of the operator’s RPASs”; and
“nominated suitable persons to be its chief [RPA] controller and maintenance controller.” 
Various conditions are imposed on an operator’s certificate, including that the person “maintains within its organisation a position of chief remote pilot” with certain minimum functions and duties.  These functions, which are inserted by the 2016 Regulation, include “ensuring the operator’s RPA functions are conducted in accordance with the civil aviation legislation,” maintaining a record of the qualifications of each person operating RPA and monitoring their operational standards and efficiency, and maintaining a library of operational documents required by CASA. 
In the past ten years, the number of certified drone operators has grown from about twenty-five to 500 (as of March 31, 2016). 
C. Operating Model Aircraft: Subpart 101.G
A “model aircraft” is defined as “an aircraft that is used for sport or recreation, and cannot carry a person.”  Subpart 101.G applies to the operation of such aircraft weighing 100 grams or more, except control-line model aircraft and model aircraft flown indoors. 
A person can operate a model aircraft only in good visibility, or at night in accordance with the written procedures of an approved organization. He or she must ensure that the aircraft remains at least 30 meters away from other people. Outside of approved areas, a model aircraft can be flown above a height of 400 feet if the operator keeps it in sight and keeps it clear of populous areas.  “Giant model aircraft,” being model aircraft weighing between 25 and 150 kilograms, may only be operated in accordance with the rules and procedures of an approved organization or an approval given by CASA. 
III. Enforcement and Penalties
CASA is responsible for enforcing the provisions in the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth) and the CASR.  Various criminal offense provisions that may be relevant to the operation of unmanned aircraft are contained in the Act. For example, a person who operates an aircraft without a certificate of airworthiness, where such a certificate is required by the regulations, may be subject to a penalty of imprisonment for two years.  The same penalty can be applied to flying an aircraft without a required license or other authorization. 
In terms of regulatory offenses, as noted above, Subpart 101.B sets out a general prohibition on the operation of any unmanned aircraft “in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft, another person, or property.”  Breaching this prohibition is a strict liability offense that is subject to a penalty of 50 penalty units. Under Australian federal law a penalty unit is currently AU$180, making the fine for this offense AU$9,000 (about US$6,815).
Other offenses accompany many of the provisions referred to in this report. For example, a fine of 50 penalty units may be imposed for not complying with a requirement related to the operation of an unmanned aircraft in controlled airspace or prescribed areas; operating an unmanned aircraft outside of the operator’s visual line of site, without a remote pilot license, or without an RPA operator’s certificate; breaching a condition of a license or certificate; or operating a very small RPA for hire or reward without notifying CASA. 
Offenses in the regulations that are subject to a fine of 25 penalty units (AU$4,500, about US$3,408) include operating an unmanned aircraft above a height of 400 feet within three nautical miles of an airfield, dropping or discharging things in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft or to a person or property, operating in prohibited visual conditions, and operating an RPA in controlled airspace without holding an aeronautical radio operator certificate.
IV. Application of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)
The CASR do not specifically address the use of camera, audio recording, or other surveillance equipment on unmanned aircraft. The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)  is a federal law that “regulates the handling of personal information about individuals.”  It contains thirteen Australian Privacy Principles setting out “standards, rights and obligations for the handling, holding, use, accessing and correction of personal information (including sensitive information).” 
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner has published correspondence with the Attorney-General from 2012 and 2013 relating to the current privacy laws and their application to surveillance or recording of information using drones. The correspondence notes that the obligations in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) only apply to federal government agencies and certain private sector organizations; they does not apply to persons acting in an individual capacity. However, in addition to the CASR, other federal and state laws could potentially apply to the use of drones by individuals to photograph or record personal information. The Attorney-General stated that she would contact state and territory governments to seek their views regarding the adequacy of current legislation in regulating the use of surveillance drones. 
In 2014, a parliamentary committee conducted a series of roundtable discussions and hearings regarding drones and privacy.  The committee’s report recommended that CASA and the Australian Privacy Commissioner review the adequacy of the privacy and air safety regimes in relation to RPA.  To date, no changes to the relevant laws have been announced. 
Prepared by Kelly Buchanan
Chief, Foreign, Comparative, and
International Law Division I
 CASA and Remotely Piloted Aircraft , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft/standard-page/casa-and-remotely-piloted-aircraft (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/6NUC-HKK7.
 Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth) (CASR), pt 101,https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2016 C00234, archived athttps://perma.cc/3K2L-24HP. The CASR are made under the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth),https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00190, archived at https://perma.cc/6WTA-EADA.
 CASA and Remotely Piloted Aircraft , supra note 1.
 CASR Part 101 – Unmanned Aircraft and Rocket Operations , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/casr-part-101-unmanned-aircraft-and-rocket-operations (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/D59Z-949V.
 Project US 14/18 – Post-Implementation Review – Certain Aspects of Part 101 of CASR , CASA, https://www.casa. gov.au/standard-page/project-us-1418-post-implementation-review-certain-aspects-part-101-casr (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/8HF6-TAMH.
 Project OS 11/20 – Review of Regulations and Guidance Material Related to Unmanned Aircraft Systems , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/project-os-1120-review-regulations-and-guidance-material-relating-unmanned-aircraft (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/PS6T-99ZY.
 NPRM 1309OS – Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/nprm-1309os-remotely-piloted-aircraft-systems (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/JP32-NWPG.
 Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 (Cth) (2016 Regulation),https://www. legislation.gov.au/Details/F2016L00400, archived at https://perma.cc/8YD4-LP3G.
 CASR Part 101 – Unmanned Aircraft and Rocket Operations , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/casr-part-101-unmanned-aircraft-and-rocket-operations (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/S26R-PG3A.
 Part 101 Amendments – Cutting Red Tape for Remotely Piloted Aircraft , CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft/ standard-page/part-101-amendments-cutting-red-tape-remotely-piloted-aircraft (last visited Apr. 4, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/49XE-275R.
 CASA and Remotely Piloted Aircraft , supra note 1.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 7.
 Id. sch 1, item 6 (inserting new r 101.028).
 See id. ; Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 – Explanatory Statement, https://www. legislation.gov.au/Details/F2016L00400/Explanatory%20Statement/Text , archived at https://perma.cc/GXC5-372F.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 91 (inserting new definition of “large RPA”), 93 (inserting new definition of “medium RPA”), 97 (inserting new definition of “small RPA”) & 101 (inserting new definition of “very small RPA”).
 Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 – Explanatory Statement, supra note 14.
 CASR Part 101, rr 101.005 & 101.060.
 Id. r 101.065.
 Id. r 101.070.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 11 (inserting new r 101.072).
 Id. sch 1, item 11 (inserting new r 101.073). “Visual line of site” means that the operator “can continually see, orient and navigate the aircraft to meet the person’s separation and collision avoidance responsibilities, with or without corrective lenses, but without the use of binoculars, a telescope or other similar device.” Id.
 CASR Part 101, rr 101.075 & 101.080.
 Id. r 101.085.
 Id. r 101.090.
 Id. r 101.095; Model Aircraft and RPA, CASA, https://www.casa.gov.au/operations/standard-page/model-aircraft-and-rpa (last visited Apr. 11, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/DB7W-ZATV.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 21 (inserting new r 101.235).
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 30 (inserting new r 101.252). Under the current (unamended) CASR provisions, the requirement is for a person to obtain “certification as a UAV controller.” Detailed provisions are contained in CASR Part 101, div 101.F.3, with the rules to be amended and substituted by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 49–64.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 37 (inserting new r 101.270). Detailed provisions related to the “certification of UAV operators” are currently contained in CASR Part 101, div 101.F.4, with rules to be amended and substituted by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 64–82. See also Operating an Unmanned Aircraft Safely, CASA, https://www.casa. gov.au/aircraft/standard-page/operating-unmanned-aircraft-safely (last visited Apr. 6, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/CLF2-CPM9.
 CASR Part 101, r 101.285, as amended by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 44–48.
 Id. Part 101, r 101.245(1).
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 24 (inserting new r 101.245(2) & (3)).
 Id. sch 1, item 25 (inserting new r 101.247).
 Id. sch 1, item 21 (inserting new r 101.237).
 CASR Part 101, r 101.240.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 21 (inserting new r 101.238).
 CASR Part 101, r 101.255.
 Id. r 101.275.
 Id. r 101.280(3).
 Id. r 101.280(5).
 Id. r 101.260.
 Id. r 101.250, as amended by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 27–29.
 Id. r 101.280(2).
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 82 (inserting new div 101.F.5).
 Id. (inserting new r 101.372).
 See Reece Clothier & Jonathan Roberts, New Relaxed Drone Regulations Will Help the Industry Take Off, The Conversation (Apr. 7, 2016), https://theconversation.com/new-relaxed-drone-regulations-will-help-the-industry-take-off-57201 , archived at https://perma.cc/2NBF-YFPV.
 CASR Part 101, r 101.295, as amended by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 54–58.
 Id . r 101.300.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 60.
 CASR Part 101, r 101.335, as amended by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 68.
 Id. r 101.340, as amended by 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 69.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, item 74 (inserting new r 101.342).
 CASA Issues 500th UAV Operator Certificate , Aviation Business (Mar. 31, 2016), http://www.aviationbusiness. com.au/news/casa-issues-500th-uav-operator-certificate , archived at https://perma.cc/PSF7-94FS.
 CASR, Dictionary, Part 1.
 CASR Part 101, r 101.375.
 Id . rr 101.385–101.400.
 Id. r 101.405.
 Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth), s 9.
 Id. s 20AA(3).
 Id. s 20AB.
 CASR Part 101, r 101.055(1).
 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 4AA(1),https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00121, archived at https://perma.cc/J8QL-HAFY. The dollar amount of a penalty unit is indexed every three years based on inflation.
 2016 Regulation, sch 1, items 11, 25, 30, 37, 60 & 82.
 CASR Part 101, rr 101.075, 101.090, 101.095 & 101.285.
 Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
 Regulation of Drone Technology , OAIC, https://www.oaic.gov.au/media-and-speeches/statements/regulation-of-drone-technology (last visited Apr. 8, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/ST9S-7EZL.
 For example, the Queensland Office of the Information Commissioner has published guidance regarding the different laws applicable to the collection of information using drone technology, although this is primarily targeted at government agencies. Privacy and Drone Technology, Office of the Information Commissioner, Queensland, https://www.oic.qld.gov.au/guidelines/for-government/guidelines-privacy-principles/applying-the-privacy-principles/privacy-and-drone-technology (last visited Apr. 8, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/4VG6-7NA3; Drones – Collection, Storage and Security of Personal Information, Office of the Information Commissioner, Queensland, https://www.oic.qld.gov.au/guidelines/for-government/guidelines-privacy-principles/applying-the-privacy-principles/drones-collection,-storage-and-security-of-personal-information (last visited Apr. 8, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/EM2N-5C48; Drones – Outsourcing, Use and Disclosure of Personal Information, Office of the Information Commissioner, Queensland, https://www.oic.qld.gov.au/ guidelines/for-government/guidelines-privacy-principles/applying-the-privacy-principles/drones-outsourcing,-use-and-disclosure-of-personal-information , archived at https://perma.cc/8SPW-ZXQT.
 Regulation of Drone Technology , supra note 67.
 Roundtable on Drones and Privacy , Parliament of Australia, House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Social_Policy_ and_Legal_Affairs/Drones (last visited Apr. 7, 2016), archived at https://perma.cc/4E95-F2XH.
 House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, Eyes in the Sky: Inquiry into Drones and the Regulation of Air Safety and Privacy (July 2014), http://www.aph.gov.au/~/ media/02%20Parliamentary%20Business/24%20Committees/243%20Reps%20Committees/SPLA/Drones/fullreport.pdf , archived at https://perma.cc/7RHU-Y7HF.
 See, e.g. , Are Australia’s Privacy Laws Ready for Drones?, HHG Legal Group (Nov. 17, 2015), http://www. hhg.com.au/blog/are-australia-s-privacy-laws-ready-for-drones-1 , archived at https://perma.cc/K7RM-AZ76; Matthew Craven & Claire Harris, Regulation of Drones in Australia – A Balancing Act, Corrs Chambers Westgarth (July 31, 2016), http://www.corrs.com.au/publications/corrs-in-brief/regulation-of-drones-in-australia-a-balancing-act , archived at https://perma.cc/6QUZ-V7A3; Kieran Gair, Privacy Concerns Mount as Drones Take to the Skies, The Sydney Morning Herald (Dec. 12, 2015), http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/privacy-concerns-mount-as-drones-take-to-the-skies-20151208-glijvk.html , archived at https://perma.cc/ RTM5-74K7; Omar Mubin, Police Drones: Can We Trust the Eyes in the Skies?, The Conversation (Feb. 29, 2016), https://theconversation.com/police-drones-can-we-trust-the-eyes-in-the-skies-53981 , archived at https://perma.cc/FY57-W2VU.
Last Updated: 07/26/2016