It’s CNN legal but you shouldn’t read this crap. Paparazzi take the pics for the readers.

Meghan Markle and Harry are having the same issue in their new LA digs.

Anonymous wrote:Reminds me of the story a few years ago of a woman in Virginia shooting down a drone flying over her property. No charges brought so I don’t think it tested any laws.

That was in a Kathy Bates movie. Once i saw that I knew I would shoot down any drone who came over my property. I am an excellent marks-woman -- learned in summer camp as a kid and been improving ever since.

Looking forward to the count battle.

Brad **vehimatley** opposed taking the kids abroad via his legal team.

And uhh, the legal team is taking his kids abroad?

This is journalism? I teach journalism at a Maryland high school and this would be a failing paper.

Reminds me of the story a few years ago of a woman in Virginia shooting down a drone flying over her property. No charges brought so I don’t think it tested any laws.

We need new laws then...

Shit I wish they would adopt me.

Flag lots have always been the gold standard for public figures for privacy reasons but now with drones, all you can do is build accessory buildings with covered walkways and utilize mature plantings to block drones, unfortunately.

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Totally, 100% legal.

Agree, totally legal. Even here in California. The laws for paparazzi are different. An average person can fly one over someone’s home legally as long as they follow the guidelines such as not over people directly, etc...

Yes. Totally, 100% legal.

How would it be any different than satellites?

I hope Angie and Brad sue the Daily Fail to smithereens. Their combined net worth is $400 million.

Yes.

In California - absolutely. The privacy laws are intense and the paparazzi know this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8384995/Brad-Angelina-decked-compounds-inflatable-toys-swings-slides-trampolines.html


This seems to be a little much.