[patrickryan]

After viewing the video of the MIT lab using the AR Drone I'm confused...

From the Development License of the SDK Drone API (Article 5 v):

"AR.Drone, shall have for sole purpose to be used by a User for entertaining, game, leisure or training. The creation of applications for the use of the PARROT Drone for military, and, without limitation, security, watching, spying, defence, cartography is strictly forbidden."

[Vivtek]

Radar detectors are sold under the same sort of disclaimer that they're never, ever, ever to be used to circumvent speed limit laws. It's safe to say we can all roll our eyes at this boilerplate.

[ceejayoz]

"This is for entertainment purposes only" is how manufacturers cover their asses from liability lawsuits when someone uses their product illegally.

[asynchronous13]

As others noted, this is largely a CYA clause. I suspect the real reason is because UAVs are a legal grey area as far as the FAA regulations are concerned. It is generally accepted that regulations for R/C aircraft also apply to UAVs. The tricky point is that the FAA regs specifically state "for recreation". So you can legally fly an R/C plane and take aerial photos as a hobby. However, if you sell those photos then now you've broken the law. (R/C clubs recommend selling one ground photo and giving away the aerial ones to skirt the issue). The AR.Parrot folks know the regulations and are simply trying to distance themselves with boiler plate.

[edave]

They have the AR.Drone for comparison and entertainment, it's not considered a serious piece of equipment at all. The drone they're actually doing research on is a Ascending Technologies Hummingbird

[joe_the_user]

If a machine gun with an SDK was currently sold, I would imagine it would include the following conditions;

"Machine gun shall have for its sole purpose training, sport and 'making a loud, satisfying noise'. Use for military purposes or for turning snitches and rival mafia dons into bloody swiss cheese is strictly forbidden"