New Bill Introduced Banning DJI In US is Serious - With FCC Punch

[Bob in Savannah]

Here is the bill. Read it for yourself.

We also need the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 to refer to.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-15677/pdf/COMPS-15677.pdf

 

[rickmurray1989]

Instead of worrying about things that I cannot control, I am going to continue to fly and make money.

 

[LGLDSR73]

The FCC news not totally new. That nutjob Brendan Carr (FCC Commisioner) already threatened DJI with an FCC ban when he was on a Twitter rant about robot dogs, the safety need to be able to kick over robot dogs and how watching movies like the Terminator and iRobot are equivilant to a college degree in robotics. And no, I am not making this up

 

[LGLDSR73]

I think if people are getting that worried about this, someone should come up with a US based or EU based company that can complete head to had with DJI. Make a brand that is just as good if not better and compete with DJI. I know there are a lot of Chinaphobes out there, and rightly so, but they should realize that DJI is a brand that is manufactured in China. Not a Chinese govt. or military based company. Maybe DJI needs to move its operation out of CCP. Just saying

The FCC news not totally new. That nutjob Brendan Carr (FCC Commisioner) already threatened DJI with an FCC ban when he was on a Twitter rant about robot dogs, the safety need to be able to kick over robot dogs and how watching movies like the Terminator and iRobot are equivilant to a college degree in robotics. And no, I am not making this up.

I think if people are getting that worried about this, someone should come up with a US based or EU based company that can complete head to had with DJI. Make a brand that is just as good if not better and compete with DJI. I know there are a lot of Chinaphobes out there, and rightly so, but they should realize that DJI is a brand that is manufactured in China. Not a Chinese govt. or military based company. Maybe DJI needs to move its operation out of CCP. Just saying

 

[LGLDSR73]

I think if people are getting that worried about this, someone should come up with a US based or EU based company that can complete head to had with DJI. Make a brand that is just as good if not better and compete with DJI. I know there are a lot of Chinaphobes out there, and rightly so, but they should realize that DJI is a brand that is manufactured in China. Not a Chinese govt. or military based company. Maybe DJI needs to move its operation out of CCP. Just saying

Mark_F,

I am far from a Chinaphobe and have many Chinese friends. I was sole Hardware support for 200 Engineers at a Qualcomm facility with absolutely brilliant Chinese and Indian Engineers. Astoundingly brilliant. There were American Engineers as well of course. It was there that they finalized the development for Qualcomm's 5G Chipset.

But we need to get away from everything we have being 'Made In China'. As a kid growing up by far and wide everything was 'Made In The USA'. Then slowly it became 'Made In Japan'. I remember my Father, a WW-II Vet, taking me out shopping with him and he told me to pick out a toy. I reached for a red Fire Truck and I recall him looking at the box and saying very matter of factly "Made in Japan. Let's put it back and find you something else". It was said nicely but he wanted 'Made In The USA'.

Anyway, we're very deep into China right now and it will be a long, long road out.

On a closing note, as far as DJI not being a military or Government based entity, the Chinese Government will take what they want and there will not be an Court of Appeals for DJI to turn to; they will do as told. Or if ordered to develop an intelligence gathering Chipset do you really think they are going to tell that Government to take a hike?

 

[LGLDSR73]

Here is the bill. Read it for yourself.

Thanks, but I'll pass.

 

[3rdof5]

Hmmm... Glad I live in Canada, at least so far, no news like this up here...

 

[LGLDSR73]

So, what about the countless UNSOLD units at Best buy, etc just sitting around in the US already? No, I don't think they will just cut off our drones out of nowhere. They will just stop importing if anything. I mean, theres a lot of stock already over here in stores, warehouses, etc. Thats a ton of dough...
I hate these congressional "representatives."

Right now they are focused on National Security. They are not concerned whether Walmart, Amazon or BestBuy takes a financial hit (which they'll just write off anyway). If I were DJI, I'd be very concerned.

 

[Bob in Savannah]

Right now they are focused on National Security. They are not concerned whether Walmart, Amazon or BestBuy takes a financial hit (which they'll just write off anyway). If I were DJI, I'd be very concerned.

Yea.. you're probably right. I'm the one that's concerned, though. grr...

 

[LGLDSR73]

Yea.. you're probably right. I'm the one that's concerned, though. grr...

You're not the only one. I just bought one and am thinking of returning it. I don't need an expensive paperweight.

 

[LGLDSR73]

We also need the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 to refer to.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-15677/pdf/COMPS-15677.pdf

After 40 years as a Network Administrator for Fortune 500 Corporations with deep pockets to buy the latest and greatest, "Secure and Trusted Communications Networks" is an oxymoron.

 

[SkywalkerFeng]

"Even if it's possible".

Remember this?

You are comparing oranges with apples in this case.

SpaceX's Starlink is a broadband internet service. Users of the service need to purchase dedicated receiver with antennas to communicate with Starlink satellites. The signal goes two ways, that's how Starlink is capable of disconnect those receivers from its network. Currently, Starlink receivers with antennas are too large and too heavy for small drones like DJI Mavic 3. They are used by Ukrainian military on the much larger military drones, which could fly hundreds of miles and launch attack on Kremlin.

GPS (a.k.a. GNSS) satellites works in a completely different way. They broadcast a unique signal and orbital parameters that allow GPS devices to decode and compute the precise location of the satellite. GPS receivers use this information and trilateration to calculate its exact location. This is a one-way communication, GPS receivers do NOT transmit any information back to the satellites. It is technically impossible for GPS satellites to "jam the signal" targeting specific GPS receivers used by DJI drones.

 

[moldorf]

You're not the only one. I just bought one and am thinking of returning it. I don't need an expensive paperweight.

you have made nearly half the posts in this thread and every single one has a the-sky-is-falling tone. Every time somebody comes up with a little different interpretation or some further context, you have a rebuttal. Maybe you are right and the sky is falling, but simply dominating the thread with your opinions, interpretations, and conjecture is not a compelling argument, at least not to me

 

[SmilingOgre]

I'm sure I'm naive in this theater as I don't sit around thinking about intelligence gathering. My question is what is the U,S, worried about being gathered by consumer pilot flights? I guess the Chinese could locate my secret bird feeder but they could do that with google maps. Do they want to know which direction people in the U.S. yaw the most? I don't get it.

 

[Vic Moss]

This is what's called a messaging bill (one proposed by congress folks to show their constituents they're doing something). Will it make much headway? Likely not. But that doesn't mean it needs to be ignored.

This bill is a continuation of Brendan Carr's attempt at making political hay. He is trying to use his office (FCC Commissioner) to leave a legacy focusing on his anti-China agenda. It's political.

We (DSPAlliance.org) are watching it. We'll report any movement, and go to DC to testify if needed and given a chance.

The real danger is if this is added to the Countering CCP Drone Act, or the 2023 FAA Reauthorization Act. That's where we truly need to be vigilant.

 

[Anthony Ivory]

I think if people are getting that worried about this, someone should come up with a US based or EU based company that can complete head to had with DJI. Make a brand that is just as good if not better and compete with DJI. I know there are a lot of Chinaphobes out there, and rightly so, but they should realize that DJI is a brand that is manufactured in China. Not a Chinese govt. or military based company. Maybe DJI needs to move its operation out of CCP. Just sa

 

[Phantomrain.org]

We cannot worry about if the earth is flat and someone might flip us over, lol

I think my only comfort is knowing that if they pull the plug on DJI drones , hackers will free our birds from the Restraints we have now and realize what a mistake that was , and maybe that is not a bad thing.

Banning DJI makes for an Incredible Advertising Campaign as it keeps coming up and DJI becomes a name like Apple very clever. lol

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain. Land on the Water

 

[Anthony Ivory]

That is nice in theory but for a US company to replace DJI will take years And you will not be able to afford the US made drones. Sample all the US built drones now and you will understand

 

[orionshooter]

Prohibiting the use of existing drones would constitute a taking under the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitutiion. While it is still possible for the government to do so, it would require just compensation to pass constitutional muster. This would make passing a bill as LGLDSR23 describes enormously expensive and virtually impossible to pass. In the course of U.S. history, I cannot think of a single piece of legislation where such a taking has been authorized except for real property pursuant to eminent domain.

As a parallel comparison, look at the efforts to ban “assault style rifles”. None of those proposals includes taking what is already owned by non government actors.

The sky is not falling.

 

[Vic Moss]

Prohibiting the use of existing drones would constitute a taking under the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitutiion. While it is still possible for the government to do so, it would require just compensation to pass constitutional muster. This would make passing a bill as LGLDSR23 describes enormously expensive and virtually impossible to pass. In the course of U.S. history, I cannot think of a single piece of legislation where such a taking has been authorized except for real property pursuant to eminent domain.

As a parallel comparison, look at the efforts to ban “assault style rifles”. None of those proposals includes taking what is already owned by non government actors.

The sky is not falling.

Good comparison.

Also, I noticed you're in Denver. Are you going to XPO next week?