I guess it could be to film your house and garden for advertising tracking purposes.

If you’ve got a new car or your kids are wearing new clothes could be important data points.

Sadly, I’m only half joking.

Whatever you can think of some fucker will be willing to try.

My municipality (US) does this for property tax purposes already, using commercial datasets. Stands to reason that this is next.

Add homeowners insurance companies as well.

It is illegal in Texas to capture, posses, display, or use images or video from drones taken of private property or people on private property without permission or other limited authorizations (active pursuit of a suspect, investigating crime scene, search warrant, some licensed real estate activity, etc)

I don't know what laws in other states/countries are, but I would guess many have something similar that would prevent that.

You don’t think they’d just deny what they were doing?

Or maybe claim any cameras are just for obstacle avoidance and require you to let them film as part of the delivery contract?

I mean Meta downloaded almost every pirated book[1] they could and no one’s really done anything to punish them.

1. https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...

Google recently agreed to a ~1.4 billion dollar settlement with Texas for privacy violations. If company is big enough to do mass drone delivery and wants to not only break the law but also lie about it, good luck to them I guess.

Sure, they can say the cameras are for "obstacle avoidance" all they want, the camera is on? Well, they just captured and used images/video of everyone's private property to get to that delivery and did so with intent. So they might have permission from the one person getting the delivery but they don't for the hundreds of others they past, and I would not want to get that settlement bill in the mail.

Why would a Waymo be stuck next to my property if it isn't dropping off someone?

Things can go wrong