DJI expressed disappointment over the US decision to block domestic sales permits for foreign drones.

Translation. Region: Russian Federation –

Source: People's Republic of China in Russian – People's Republic of China in Russian –

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

Source: People's Republic of China – State Council News

SHENZHEN, Dec. 23 (Xinhua) — Chinese drone giant DJI expressed disappointment on Tuesday over the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to add foreign-made drones to a list of banned products.

Updated Monday, the "Blocked List" identifies communications equipment and services that the FCC believes pose an unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the safety of U.S. citizens.

Inclusion on this list means that new foreign-made drone models and critical components are prohibited from obtaining FCC approval, effectively banning their import and sale in the country, the FCC noted.

DJI's statement said that while DJI was not singled out, no information about the data used by the executive branch to make that decision was made public.

The company noted that its products are among the safest and most reliable on the market, citing years of testing by U.S. government agencies and independent third parties.

Concerns about DJI's data security are not factually based and reflect protectionism that runs counter to open market principles, the company said.

This amendment follows a defense bill passed by the US Congress a year ago that highlighted the national security risks posed by Chinese drones. Under this bill, DJI and another Chinese drone manufacturer, Autel, were threatened with a ban on selling new models in the US if a safety assessment found them to pose a threat.

This measure does not apply to previously purchased drones. Consumers can continue to use any drones they have already legally purchased or received, the FCC noted.

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source. It represents an accurate account of the source's assertions and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.