Drones pose growing privacy risk

Let's imagine celebrities X and Y are engaging in private recreational activity in their backyard when a small surveillance drone flies over them.

Before they know it, the images it captures are posted on the net.

So what redress could X and Y have against this grievous breach of their privacy?

The answer is not much, a parliamentary committee has found.

It says the existing complexity of privacy law and the difficulty of regulating the emerging technology are creating challenges which need to be considered.

"Remotely-piloted aircraft have the potential to pose a serious threat to Australians' privacy," its report says, adding the situation is not helped by the complexity of Australian privacy law.

The House of Representative committee chairman, Nationals MP George Christensen, said the drone industry was growing rapidly.

This isn't about military use of drones but their growing civil use for journalism, cinematography, policing, emergency services, mining, agriculture and scientific research and also recreational use.

There was a need to protect Australians from "malicious drone use" while permitting this dynamic new industry to grow, Mr Christensen said.

Already there have been some problems.

In October 2013, a small recreational drone crashed onto the Sydney Harbour bridge railway after its operator lost control.

In March this year a rescue helicopter at Newcastle had to take evasive action to avoid a RPA.

In April, a RPA filming a triathlon crashed into one of the competitors.

The lower house report says the many gaps in privacy law could be addressed by creation of a civil wrong, a proposal now being considered by the Australian Law Reform Commission.

Then there's education.

As it stands now, commercial RPA use is regulated by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority but recreational use is governed by the same regulations covering model aircraft.

That includes a requirement not to fly near airports.

CASA has reached an agreement with RPA retailers to provide new operators with a pamphlet setting out the rules.

The committee suggested the pamphlets be expanded to entreat RPA operators not to spy on private activities.