The FCC just gave itself the power to make a DJI drone ban stick

[mavic3usa]

It's back! Looks like we have company.

US government is getting closer to banning TP-Link routers

The commerce department is considering a ban on TP-Link routers and other products.

www.engadget.com

US Effort to Ban TP-Link Routers Picks Up Steam

A proposal to ban TP-Link device sales in the US gains support from several US agencies, clearing the way for the Commerce Department to act, The Washington Post reports.

www.pcmag.com

 

[mavic3usa]

No longer is it just the FAA we need to be concerned with, the FCC as well

Here's your FCC, if you think the FAA was bad.....:

FCC will vote to scrap telecom cybersecurity requirements

The commission’s Republican chair, who voted against the rules in January, calls them ineffective and illegal.

www.cybersecuritydive.com

 

[GadgetGuy]

When I think of this, I envision whatever is going on over Washington DC to be expanded across the country. It works. Even the YouTubers know better than to launch a drone on the Mall. Clearly it's not going to stop the criminals but it would be very effective at grounding most DJI drones without much effort. It won't be the only tool but it would be one of the tools and the government would be remiss if they skipped this method if they really wanted to ban DJI drones. I think we shouldn't assume they don't know this is an option.

Well, if you completely outlaw drones, everyone flying one will be easy to spot and prosecute. No need to disable the frequencies upon which they operate. We are already halfway there, by prohibiting taking off or landing on property controlled by the government in some form, whether local, state or federal, and on private property that you do not own. Add VLOS to it, and you might as well fly a kite instead!

 

[GadgetGuy]

I'd assume there are at least a couple of options

make it a federal crime to fly a DJI drone although that would be difficult to enforce. But if it was a federal crime I sure wouldn't risk flying a DJI drone. Not with remote ID in place

another way might be thru the DJI Fly App. The Feds could try and compel DJI to ground their drones. Maybe a carrot/stick approach? The Feds could tell DJI that if they cooperated their might come a future date when the ban would be rescinded. One way might be too leave the requirement for logging in every 30 days (may be 90 days now) in place, but block log-ins and eventually most newer DJI drones would be limited to 30M in height and 50M in distance....effectively grounded

obviously, for older models the Litchi hacks would be an option but if the Feds are determined to shut down DJI they won't ignore Litchi.

As I postulated earlier, DJI would have to be in on the fix, and they are unlikely to want to screw over their loyal existing user base that is still acquiring their drones internationally. Clearly, DJI has the capability to ground all their drones, but what possible leverage could the U.S. have over an already "banned" Chinese company to compel them to do so? GEO was DJI's proactive way of staving off RID, but they removed GEO earlier this year, partly out of spite, and partly because it was a liability and expensive to maintain.

 

[moldorf]

As I postulated earlier, DJI would have to be in on the fix, and they are unlikely to want to screw over their loyal existing user base that is still acquiring their drones internationally. Clearly, DJI has the capability to ground all their drones, but what possible leverage could the U.S. have over an already "banned" Chinese company to compel them to do so? GEO was DJI's proactive way of staving off RID, but they removed GEO earlier this year, partly out of spite, and partly because it was a liability and expensive to maintain.

obviously, it would be an 'extreme' option....a remote chance outcome. But since Rep Stefanik pocketed her campaign contributions from Skydio and went on her anti-DJI jihad 18 months ago, every step of the way has included the possibility of an 'extreme' option. All kinds of steps that had a remote chance of happening when all this started have become reality, over and over again

Vic Moss and others, have said over and over that the chicken little's were over-reacting, but guess what...they weren't

so, if the US government insisted that DJI work to ground their drones in the USA, why would they cooperate? Well, for starters, they may not want to tell the US to pound sand because they are unwilling to foreclose on the possibility of reacquiring access to the US market for their drone products in the future. They also might not want to risk the US retaliating by banning sales of the DJI power stations and Osmo cameras & equipment in the US. There is also the possibility that in the tariff wars between China and the USA, it may become in China's interest to ask DJI to cooperate. The DJI portion of the US/China trade balance is insignificant

how could it be accomplished? Well, I'm not an expert, but I'd wonder if all DJI would have to do is block the logon procedure that reactivates the Fly app from functioning with ISP addresses in the USA. Within 1-3 months DJI drones in the USA would be effectively grounded

and as I mentioned, in the 'extreme' scenario of the FCC revoking the licenses for all US drones, it then would be a simple step to make flying DJI drones a crime, and use Remote ID as the tool for doing so. Obviously it seems unlikely that there would be any significant enforcement authority or action. But if taking out my Mavic 3, with remote ID, and flying it is a crime, I ain't going to do it, no matter how much I disagree with the law

 

[anotherlab]

obviously, it would be an 'extreme' option....a remote chance outcome. But since Rep Stefanik pocketed her campaign contributions from Skydio and went on her anti-DJI jihad 18 months ago, every step of the way has included the possibility of an 'extreme' option. All kinds of steps that had a remote chance of happening when all this started have become reality, over and over again

Vic Moss and others, have said over and over that the chicken little's were over-reacting, but guess what...they weren't

so, if the US government insisted that DJI work to ground their drones in the USA, why would they cooperate? Well, for starters, they may not want to tell the US to pound sand because they are unwilling to foreclose on the possibility of reacquiring access to the US market for their drone products in the future. They also might not want to risk the US retaliating by banning sales of the DJI power stations and Osmo cameras & equipment in the US. There is also the possibility that in the tariff wars between China and the USA, it may become in China's interest to ask DJI to cooperate. The DJI portion of the US/China trade balance is insignificant

how could it be accomplished? Well, I'm not an expert, but I'd wonder if all DJI would have to do is block the logon procedure that reactivates the Fly app from functioning with ISP addresses in the USA. Within 1-3 months DJI drones in the USA would be effectively grounded

and as I mentioned, in the 'extreme' scenario of the FCC revoking the licenses for all US drones, it then would be a simple step to make flying DJI drones a crime, and use Remote ID as the tool for doing so. Obviously it seems unlikely that there would be any significant enforcement authority or action. But if taking out my Mavic 3, with remote ID, and flying it is a crime, I ain't going to do it, no matter how much I disagree with the law

As much fun as it is to slam Stefanik, the legislation that targeted DJI had wide bipartisan support.

DJI has spent the last couple of years doing what it could to show the US government that the drones were not sending data back to China. They have little to lose now. They would have little to lose by ignoring any request to ground existing drones. Plus, the government would be facing lawsuits for compensation over the elimination of all reasonable economic use or value of the drone for its owners.

Revoking the existing licenses is probably more of a tactic to block DJI from selling the existing models than it is to grounding ones already out there.

 

[mavic3usa]

obviously, it would be an 'extreme' option....a remote chance outcome. But since Rep Stefanik pocketed her campaign contributions from Skydio and went on her anti-DJI jihad 18 months ago, every step of the way has included the possibility of an 'extreme' option. All kinds of steps that had a remote chance of happening when all this started have become reality, over and over again

Vic Moss and others, have said over and over that the chicken little's were over-reacting, but guess what...they weren't

so, if the US government insisted that DJI work to ground their drones in the USA, why would they cooperate? Well, for starters, they may not want to tell the US to pound sand because they are unwilling to foreclose on the possibility of reacquiring access to the US market for their drone products in the future. They also might not want to risk the US retaliating by banning sales of the DJI power stations and Osmo cameras & equipment in the US. There is also the possibility that in the tariff wars between China and the USA, it may become in China's interest to ask DJI to cooperate. The DJI portion of the US/China trade balance is insignificant

how could it be accomplished? Well, I'm not an expert, but I'd wonder if all DJI would have to do is block the logon procedure that reactivates the Fly app from functioning with ISP addresses in the USA. Within 1-3 months DJI drones in the USA would be effectively grounded

and as I mentioned, in the 'extreme' scenario of the FCC revoking the licenses for all US drones, it then would be a simple step to make flying DJI drones a crime, and use Remote ID as the tool for doing so. Obviously it seems unlikely that there would be any significant enforcement authority or action. But if taking out my Mavic 3, with remote ID, and flying it is a crime, I ain't going to do it, no matter how much I disagree with the law

Another example would be Trump and Xi meeting again and working on the trade deal that always seems to be "in progress" and Trump wants to ground all DJI drones (per the request from Jr) and he offers Xi another 0.5% increase in soybeans (whatever that means) and Xi says OK. The point is it would take very little give on the US side to erase DJI and I know people will disagree but Chairman Xi has the power because he's the head of DJI CCP and before his plane touch down in Beijing, a sw download to brick all US DJI drones would be "pending" in our queue all of a sudden as a "mandatory" update.

Likely not going to happen but you know what they say about "uncertainty":

[PerplexityAI]

The saying often associated with "government uncertainty" is: "Markets hate uncertainty." This phrase reflects the broader idea that political or governmental instability makes it difficult for businesses and investors to plan for the future, leading to hesitation, reduced investment, and potentially economic downturns. Government uncertainty can arise from unclear policy direction, leadership changes, or regulatory shifts, and it tends to create volatility in financial markets.

Another frequently referenced idea is: "Uncertainty is the enemy of growth," especially in economic contexts. This concept emphasizes that unclear or inconsistent government actions can stifle economic progress and discourage entrepreneurship.

These sayings capture the general sentiment that clear, stable governance is preferred for economic confidence and planning.

 

[anotherlab]

It's back! Looks like we have company.

US government is getting closer to banning TP-Link routers

The commerce department is considering a ban on TP-Link routers and other products.

www.engadget.com

US Effort to Ban TP-Link Routers Picks Up Steam

A proposal to ban TP-Link device sales in the US gains support from several US agencies, clearing the way for the Commerce Department to act, The Washington Post reports.

www.pcmag.com

Unlike DJI, TP-Link Systems is being used as a bargaining chip by the Trump administration in its trade talks with China. TP-Link routers are potentially a far more serious risk to the US than drones.

For the sake of argument, pretend that both TP-Link and DJI products were a security risk. With the drones, DJI could be sending data back to China. The value of that data is questionable. With TP-Link's market share, they could be used for the distribution of malware. That is a far more serious risk. And that has already happened with the Quad7 botnet.

In reality, we face a greater risk of people using home routers with the default password or something like "Password123". Or not patching their routers to fix security issues. But there have been orchestrated attacks that used compromised TP-Link networking gear. This doesn't mean that China planted anything in the gear, but it does mean that TP-Link gear was compromised because of the security vulnerabilities in the devices. Due to TP-Link's market share, hackers will target them because if they know of a security issue, they'll go after the device that provides the largest attack surface.

So reboot your home router tonight. Most malware sent to a router won't survive a reboot, but they may have opened up settings to make your router more vulnerable. Then check to see if there are any firmware updates for your router.