In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

The ruling cited privacy. What that privacy is is irrelevant.

it's not irrelevant.

Of course it's irrelevant. Privacy means nobody should know what the
substance of what was private. The father's motivations may be narrower
- but the judge's ruling is what was relevant: privacy.

then why not shoot down *any* plane that overflys someone's property?

where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around 2000 feet
(the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet).

someone on board could have a high resolution camera with a long
telephoto lens and get far better quality results than from an fpv
drone that's a few hundred feet up.