http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf

Be sure to post your comment on this NPR, particularly if you can present a cogent argument in favor of your position on the matter. The purpose of this looks like they want to establish a clear separation of hobby use from commercial use and protect the airspace from hobbyists posing a risk to real aircraft, all in preparation for some pretty strict rules pertaining to the remainder of the UAV space, i.e. everything not a model aircraft.

It appears the FAA continues to try to violate the court rulings on multirotors used for commercial filming.

It appears to be a request for comments on a proposed interpretation. Whether this requires amendments to current legislation isn't stated or if it's already within the agency's powers to interpret what a model aircraft is. My impression of the court ruling is that the FAA's current wording lacks definition, so you'd expect the FAA to address this.

They have to go through the NPRM process in order to define an RC as an aircraft, the comment period is part of that process.

Its unfortunate that we don'e have an attorney to give us a voice at the negotiating table, the comments are worthless.

Well, you can complain there, or complain here. If you complain here it's just noise. There would appear to be a good argument that could be made that the commercial use restriction is arbitrary and that it serves to inhibit economic development in the area of unmanned flight. Furthermore, FAA has a long history of slow adaptation of technology which through its rule making in the area of model aircraft rule making serves to stifle technological progress. Or something like that.

Someone did complain, and not to the FAA which is useless, who was overstepping their bounds, but to the Federal Courts, which ruled the FAA was violating the law related to commercial use of multirotor radio control hobby planes.