Comment by sacnoradhq
3 years ago
Uninteresting lawyer chiseling. This is all about the making the author feel "smart" by selective (mis)interpretation of ambiguous conditions, absent information, and rules not present.
1: "In" a geographic area may or may not be defined as including or excluding a particular altitude. For example, in the US, owners only own up to 500 ft AGL in Class G airspace.
2: Some jurisdictions decide a person in a boat over someone's land isn't trespassing, while standing on the bottom of the land is.
3: What is the definition of a "vehicle"? Is use or capability of occupants definitive of vehicular status? Does it require a motor? Must it be a type requiring government registration?
The point of the exercise is to require you to make decisions under uncertain conditions with limited (or next to no) information.
You don't know what jurisdiction. You don't know what airspace rules apply. "Vehicle" has its common-usage definition. (Which is different for different people, judgung by the comments here.)
BTW, the vast, vast majority of real decisions are made under uncertainty. Welcome to the real world.