No. Air rights extend only as high as the land owner reasonably uses. A landowner with a 3-story house has a rightful claim to higher airspace than a neighbor with a single story house. The specific height has not been determined in a courtroom, but it's likely to be a short distance (~10ft) above any structures on the property.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

So, can a govt drone fly 100' over my house and photography me sunbathing nude in my fenced backyard?

In the U.S., the current legal precedent requires a warrant for aerial surveillance, independent of height. The exception to that rule would be during an active event -- like if a bank robber happened to be running through your neighborhood trying to get away.

According to the FAA, 1 inch. Remember the recent story of some schmuck piloting a quad-copter less than a foot from his neighbor's window? There was much arguing of whether said neighbor would be within rights to shoot the thing out of the air, and the HN consensus was, "nope".

So the drones should not be able to take picture of anything below 500 feet above ground without a warrant, but they could fly over 500 feet without taking pics/vid. OK?