Two weeks ago I received a reminder from DJI FlySafe to update my Custom Unlock Application.

Unfortunately I can no longer submit an application because DJI now require me to submit written documentation from my local authorities, granting me approval to fly within restricted zones. The tough part is, these NFZs are growing in size at an exponential rate in my area. Aside from that, I can’t get approval anyway because I don't have an Advanced Flying License, only a Basic License.

My primary reason for buying a drone in the first place was to use it for still photography. That's why I bought a Mavic 2 Pro. Now, with ever increasing restrictions on where I can and can’t fly, I find that using a drone for my work is far too inconvenient. I’m sorry it cost me several thousand dollars to find this out. As far as I’m concerned, arial photography is off my wish list. It seems only those who live near wilderness areas can benefit from flying cameras, which leaves many of us out of luck… unless of course we purchase drones that are not arbitrarily controlled by the manufacturer. Have to give this some serious thought.

Hi, there walttheartist, We're sorry to read the frustrations and we do apologize for the inconvenience. Unfortunately, we require the written documentation from your local government for us to possible process the unlock request since we are abiding the local government rules and regulations to fly a drone on a specific location. For further information, you may email our Flysafe department at flysafe@dji.com. Thank you for your understanding and once again I'm sorry for the trouble. Have a good one.

ya not like it used to be. We all knew it was coming.....well those of us that have been flying quads for a few years now have.

This brings up a question.  

Is Canadian government only targeting DJI to force their drones to support NFZ?

You know much of this is really down to governments, Canada seems to be making a real stiff point here and my guess is because it’s been driven by your government not your Avaition Authority, they may well be pushing people towards becoming fully licensed, and this seems like your only option, while it’s a bit of a drag once your up and running in the system, then you will find many doors will be opened pretty easily once you get used to the whole thing .

I think transport Canada are the ones you need to point the finger at.

A J Posted at 5-11 02:23
I think transport Canada are the ones you need to point the finger at.

Doesn't it seem strange that Canadian government has setup a policy in which DJI is only company that can enforce policy, and DJI is requiring written documentation?  Yet there are other brands of drones in which this would be a non issue...

Logic is not there.  Something is missing.   Perhaps Canadian government getting ready to mandate all drones must have internal GEO Fencing of TFRs & NFZs?   Perhaps companies which already have that capability pushing Canadian government to move forward with mandate.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 5-11 09:47
Doesn't it seem strange that Canadian government has setup a policy in which DJI is only company that can enforce policy, and DJI is requiring written documentation?  Yet there are other brands of drones in which this would be a non issue...

Logic is not there.  Something is missing.   Perhaps Canadian government getting ready to mandate all drones must have internal GEO Fencing of TFRs & NFZs?   Perhaps companies which already have that capability pushing Canadian government to move forward with mandate.

As DJI are the largest global and most famous brand of civilian camera drones with a market share of over 70% I think the aviation authorities around the world will look to them to implement this technology and I suspect it will be written into legislation leading the smaller companies needing to follow suit. The UK CAA are already consulting on FINS tech... Just because we can buy and fly say an Autel product today without Geo doesn't mean that drone won't have geo later down the line or worse, become an illegal product if Autel can not make it compliant to revised legal directives and legislation. This is what a lot of people forget. DJI has absolutely no commercial interest in restricting their own products - it's costly to update and maintain, impacts on the relative freedoms of their customers and makes no business sense. It is the aviation authorities led by their respective government that enforce these restrictions that DJI have to follow and I believe all drone manufacturers will eventually have to follow suit in time.

A J Posted at 5-11 13:08
As DJI are the largest global and most famous brand of civilian camera drones with a market share of over 70% I think the aviation authorities around the world will look to them to implement this technology and I suspect it will be written into legislation leading the smaller companies needing to follow suit. The UK CAA are already consulting on FINS tech... Just because we can buy and fly say an Autel product today without Geo doesn't mean that drone won't have geo later down the line or worse, become an illegal product if Autel can not make it compliant to revised legal directives and legislation. This is what a lot of people forget. DJI has absolutely no commercial interest in restricting their own products - it's costly to update and maintain, impacts on the relative freedoms of their customers and makes no business sense. It is the aviation authorities led by their respective government that enforce these restrictions that DJI have to follow and I believe all drone manufacturers will eventually have to follow suit in time.

No business interest?  Perhaps.  
When you are in a business which has in place technology your competitors do not, would it not be of good business interest to push for mandatory use of such technology?  Thus, letting countries / governments around world lock-out competition for sometime to come...

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 5-11 18:58
No business interest?  Perhaps.  
When you are in a business which has in place technology your competitors do not, would it not be of good business interest to push for mandatory use of such technology?  Thus, letting countries / governments around world lock-out competition for sometime to come...

If you patent that technology and charge your competitors through the nose to use it then yes, that would be great for business but I’m sure others will create their own geo or even all manufacturers will have to use government owned and controlled geo in the future... let’s hope not!

Geo Fencing for Drones, is it a dirty word.

Good, it helps all drone users stay within the law, it protects other aircraft, it protects our national monuments our national parks our heritage is protected for generations to come, it protects the general public who fly who visit our national parks monuments etc. It protects all users from breaking the Law and heavy fines and for some the possibility of Jail .

Bad, the only bad thing I can see with geo for drones is zones that are not correctly marked out, but just like google maps when new roads are made when large buildings are removed , when our geography changes, so google maps has to change to improve its systems.

I was travelling a couple of weeks ago with a friend, we were approaching our hotel when I got a push notification advertising a competitors Hotel, my friend who is the multi media marketing business tells me this notice is a result of a geo zone set up by the other hotel/conglomerate to push its advertising to people heading to competitors hotel.
I was totally amazed at this and the fact that I’m living and breathing everyday with geo zones.
While I hear so many complain about Geo Fencing for drones which keeps so many safe and much good is accomplished by using it, no one benefits financially from it.
Yet we sit back and accept being manipulated by the world of advertising, which has only one interest and that’s lining its own pockets.

Many NFZ are rightly imposed by avaition authorities government bodies etc, in the most for the general good, if we as drone users want some acceptance we have to live and respect others and if rules need to be put in place for the greater good so be it .

The sky is an enormous piece of real estate and there is plenty of room for people to fly.
We see other hobbies which have to find their own ground and areas to partake in their hobbies with many restrictions, and just taking two very diverse hobbies I will explain what I mean.

Fishing which has been around since the year dot, is now heavily regulated to insure that it will be around for our children and many years to come.

Scrambling motor bikes, a hobby which is extremely loud and can cause much annoyance for people except for those partaking in the hobby, but we don’t see them on our football fields in our national parks on the runways of our airports, drone users just like dirt bikes will have to find the places to use their drones that don’t upset our fellow man.

The tough part is, these NFZs are growing in size at an exponential rate in my area.

The NFZs and TFRs are growing, because there is no push-back, no advocates for drones.  As there are for anti-droners, who are backed by Politicians wanting more power and control, and Fabricating News media who are all to willing to push propaganda to sell copies.  


In U.S., ban of drones from U.S. National Parks is utter rubbish.  Have Legally snowmobiled through National Parks, and those make a heck of lot more noise than even Mavic (angry bee) Air does.  Ban was strictly one-side and rubber-stamped by Tree-huggers at National Park Service, uneducated / paid-off members of U.S. Congress, with backing of our politically corrupt (AGW) EPA.

It’s almost funny, there were no tree huggers in parks in national parks in my country yet they were banned, I’m amazed that someone would think 100 drones on a Sunday afternoon in any countries national parks should be welcomed, I find this ludicrous and an arrogance of drone flyers who have no respect for those who would rather be protected from a free for all droning community taking over their national parks, I have to say that I and the drone community I belong to have much more respect for national parks monuments and particularly the protection of our national heritage for those who will come after us.

I believe drone flying just like scrambling bikes banger car racing and anything similar , that would both upset families our young children and all of society that choose particularly in cities to seek the sanctuary of our national parks. I mean a 100 drones on a Sunday afternoon maybe the tree huggers were right .

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-12 21:24
Dirt bikes & ATVs were restricted because they TEAR THE PLACE UP.  If a drone gets stuck in a tree or crashes into a nose at Mt. Rushmore no one will even notice.

I suppose if a drone gets stuck in somebody’s face it might be a problem, I think your government realized that if you let one in , then the masses will follow suit, and while you think one drone would not be intrusive where do you stand on a hundred or a thousand.

It seems you don’t like dji fitting geo to their drones and you also don’t like government legislating to protect people and property , but guns vehicles and fishing are bound by the laws of your country and mine, so what makes you think drones shouldn’t be, or I suppose the question I’m looking to be answered is how would you like drones to be treated in the main stream, it’s very easy to throw stones when you don’t have to make decisions on how best to protect citizens and property, but perhaps not so easy when required to be responsible for others and their property . And remember laws are usually made not only to cover the here and now but what may happen in the future.
I’m sure if you have a better way you won’t mind putting it up to be picked at and prodded etc .

Personally, I do not think it appropriate for a company in a communist country to be allowed to enforce the laws of another sovereign nation.

FatherXmas Posted at 5-13 05:48
Personally, I do not think it appropriate for a company in a communist country should be allowed to enforce the laws of another sovereign nation.

They didn’t pass the laws, your government and FAA passed the laws, they fitted your drone with the tech , apart from older models like P4 and before , everyone purchased their drones with SW already installed, if they acted illegal then it’s a simple matter of your trading standards taking up the matter with dji .
My guess is your government and the FAA are not opposed to the SW in dji drones , and I wonder if it would not be the case that your trading standards on behalf of government and FAA would be asking that this SW be installed in every drone to be sold in your country or any other country.

Although I have mainly targeted this at your country it is the same for any country that sells dji drones, along with many other drones who have also adopted the same or similar SW, but it seems that Americans seem to be more affected than any other nationalities.

So the long and short of it is no communist company has enforced any laws on Americans, but however I’m not so sure that a communist country hasn’t influenced who presides as head of your government  ;+)..

hallmark007 Posted at 5-13 02:00
I suppose if a drone gets stuck in somebody’s face it might be a problem, I think your government realized that if you let one in , then the masses will follow suit, and while you think one drone would not be intrusive where do you stand on a hundred or a thousand.

It seems you don’t like dji fitting geo to their drones and you also don’t like government legislating to protect people and property , but guns vehicles and fishing are bound by the laws of your country and mine, so what makes you think drones shouldn’t be, or I suppose the question I’m looking to be answered is how would you like drones to be treated in the main stream, it’s very easy to throw stones when you don’t have to make decisions on how best to protect citizens and property, but perhaps not so easy when required to be responsible for others and their property . And remember laws are usually made not only to cover the here and now but what may happen in the future.

Really Hallmark? Your logic is skewed. Letting one in will get you hundreds, or thousands? Your such a putz!  Come on, get you head out of DJI's ass and see the light. How many times have you visited a park, anywhere, to find Hundreds of people? Let alone the thousand of which you speak. And how many of them are quad owners? I'll bet if you questioned all of them, 5 out of 100 would own a quad and that # is probably high. We are not stupid people. We are responsible owners and customers being handcuffed by DJI. Let me, the customer, make the decision of where to fly and when to fly. FULL LEGAL consequences would then fall on me, and should fall on me. Even if I could fly in a national park I wouldn't. I would make that decision based on my respect for the wildlife there and the tranquility of the place. It's just part of my responsible nature. You'll always have stupid people out there doing stupid things. NO amount of legislation will squash out stupid....... Just look at casey Nutsack.

Bill B Posted at 5-13 08:36
Really Hallmark? Your logic is skewed. Letting one in will get you hundreds, or thousands? Your such a putz!  Come on, get you head out of DJI's ass and see the light. How many times have you visited a park, anywhere, to find Hundreds of people? Let alone the thousand of which you speak. And how many of them are quad owners? I'll bet if you questioned all of them, 5 out of 100 would own a quad and that # is probably high. We are not stupid people. We are responsible owners and customers being handcuffed by DJI. Let me, the customer, make the decision of where to fly and when to fly. FULL LEGAL consequences would then fall on me, and should fall on me. Even if I could fly in a national park I wouldn't. I would make that decision based on my respect for the wildlife there and the tranquility of the place. It's just part of my responsible nature. You'll always have stupid people out there doing stupid things. NO amount of legislation will squash out stupid....... Just look at casey Nutsack.

legislation is not for idiots , idiots will always be idiots, I'm not sure where you got that I had my head up dji's ass, as it had nothing to do with anything, so maybe get your head out of your own ass and read what I wrote, it seems your more intent on attacking me than debating anything.

I think you will find that many more users than not would prefer to already have geo SW in their drone that keeps them out of NFZ and warns if approaching, I know its probably easy for a pro like you who knows everything.

I once was lucky enough to hike to mesa Arch to photograph at Sunset, so hiking in the dark at all hours of the morning I arrived to find more than 50 photographers lined up to shoot and another 20/30 waiting hopefully to get a shot, so yes once the word is out there is always a possibility of a large gathering which will grow as the sales of drones go, some 5 years ago I was one of the only owners of a photographic drone in Ireland, now there are thousands.

yes I believe drones should be banned from national parks also any national heritage sites and by the looks of it most people and countries agree.

With regards to your own Casey Nutsack well he has a tremendous following, maybe this says more about his followers than him.

BTW I visited a National park in Dublin last Summer, there was over half a million people there, I couldn't tell you how many were drone owners were present as it is a NFZ .

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-13 09:34
Where do you stand on tens of thousands of park visitors on foot, trampling everything underfoot, littering, with screaming kids in tow?  Visit a major National Park & you'll sit in line to get through the gates.  There wouldn't be hundreds or thousands of drones over the park at any given time.

I am for enforcing drone laws the same way we enforce laws for everything else.  When police catch people in the act of violating laws they are charged.  Ford doesn't broadcast your identity, speed, & location to the authorities.  Chevy doesn't dictate when you are allowed to start your motor.  Dodge doesn't force your truck to auto-park should it veer from the roadway.  

That’s exactly what parks are for so I don’t have a problem, as regards the police policing the laws I fully agree, but I also believe since the first laws were enacted that police were given a set of tools to serve them cracking crime, I believe that these tools have greatly progressed, including knowing there whereabouts of people when crimes were committed like telecoms , or do you think that telecoms that know exactly where you are at anytime of the day almost, should be disqualified in evidence.

I’m kinda amazed that almost everybody that isn’t living under a rock can be found , they can be pinpointed we know almost everything they have eaten and where they ate it, yet we are whinging at a technology that as of yet nobody has been prosecuted by using any information handed over by dji.

I’m getting visions of all those complaining also airing their complaints on telecom forums regarding what is known about them.

I think the problem here is simply that it’s probably impossible to fly your drone in a NFZ without being identified, unless with a drone hacked SW or drone that doesn’t have geo SW active on it.
I get the feeling that you think it’s your prerogative whether you break the law, but there are consequences for almost everything we do illegally and yes by all means break the law, but don’t go crying if the law has the where with all to bang you up right .
Yes the odds are getting more and more stacked against those willing to break them, I for one am quite happy about this.

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-13 09:34
Where do you stand on tens of thousands of park visitors on foot, trampling everything underfoot, littering, with screaming kids in tow?  Visit a major National Park & you'll sit in line to get through the gates.  There wouldn't be hundreds or thousands of drones over the park at any given time.

I am for enforcing drone laws the same way we enforce laws for everything else.  When police catch people in the act of violating laws they are charged.  Ford doesn't broadcast your identity, speed, & location to the authorities.  Chevy doesn't dictate when you are allowed to start your motor.  Dodge doesn't force your truck to auto-park should it veer from the roadway.  

Exactly Dirty Bird Hallmark is a douche. Has no life at all. I stop in here once in a while to check on updates. Every thread I read, has this douche tossing out his word salads. He's a fan boy with no life.

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-13 10:43
You are happy because there are "subjects" & there are "free men".  You are the former.  I am the latter.  So when the police show up to have a chat when you've said something politically incorrect, you're good with that.  I'm not.

I can disable location services on my phone, or turn it off completely if I wish to be discrete.  I can't fly a DJI drone without their software logging & broadcasting (unless I use custom firmware).  If my truck dictated when I could start the motor, where I could drive, how fast I could travel, & actively broadcast my identity & location, I'd have a problem with that too.  So would most normal people.  

I think your leaving out the most important bit here, and it shows you up for the hypocrite you are, you had a choice and you were well aware of the choice but you didn’t have the strength of your convictions, you succumbed to supporting those you despise, you could have opted out you had a choice, but needed to grow a pair to show any conviction.

You also have the option to fly using the option of pilot app which offers complete confidentiality, you choose to bypass this, you use a device for flying it will also have your location and much more info than you think, you have clearly synced many flights so maybe not really that much bothered who knows what.
It seems you like to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds, I’m programmed to care for my fellow man which I do and I have no problem with that and I make no bones about it, you prefer to whine instead of standing up for something you believe in, it’s obvious enough you like it enough to keep doing it .

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-13 11:29
Huh?  For me personally these things are a non-issue.  I cut DJI strings except for the Mavic 2.  Even those are partially severed & will be gone completely soon.  I run custom firmware & a custom app.  I don't have a problem with syncing my flights because I do so VOLUNTARILY.  My issue is being told when & where I can fly & broadcasting my identity & location live without my consent.  I also have an issue with the inane way DJI has chosen to handle egress into an NFZ, or being caught up in a TFR zone as was discussed in the now-deleted thread on that subject.

Well I don’t know and I don’t believe anyone knows how exactly TFR is handled except it has some anomaly’s, I would be surprised if dji were acting completely on there own without consultation with the necessary bodies to insure how this can be done correctly, but I’m sure the whole process is still in a learning stage, so reporting is what will help make it better and safer.
Good luck.

What area do you live in?

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-13 11:29
Huh?  For me personally these things are a non-issue.  I cut DJI strings except for the Mavic 2.  Even those are partially severed & will be gone completely soon.  I run custom firmware & a custom app.  I don't have a problem with syncing my flights because I do so VOLUNTARILY.  My issue is being told when & where I can fly & broadcasting my identity & location live without my consent.  I also have an issue with the inane way DJI has chosen to handle egress into an NFZ, or being caught up in a TFR zone as was discussed in the now-deleted thread on that subject.

being caught up in a TFR zone as was discussed in the now-deleted thread on that subject.

A case of to many inconvenient questions and information was coming forth about TFR / NFZs.

Dirty Bird Posted at 5-12 21:24
Dirt bikes & ATVs were restricted because they TEAR THE PLACE UP.  If a drone gets stuck in a tree or crashes into a nose at Mt. Rushmore no one will even notice.

If a drone gets stuck in a tree or crashes into a nose at Mt. Rushmore no one will even notice.

For most part, yes.   It is mind boggling that some think even a couple hundred drones in our National Parks would be a danger.


FAA - 667,637 registered drones
Largest US National Park - 8,323,148 acres (roughly 40% size of island off coast of U.K.)
1 Drone per 12.5 Acres - assuming all registered drones were flown every day in aforementioned single U.S. National Park.  (Besides all National Parks, there are State and City parks...)

Idea of entire areas of National Parks being off limits to drones for entire 365 days a year shows one of several problems with Tree Huggers.  Despite no reported damage to National Parks due to drones, Tree Huggers answer was total Ban on drones.  Tree Huggers have no concept of sharing, since they think only they are entitled to land.   No thoughts of having designated days or times for flying drones, and/or specfic areas in National Parks for flying drones.  No thought of charging fees to fly in National Parks same as fees charged for camping or visiting National Parks.  Most ridiculous part is Tree Huggers think of themselves as "the Conservationists".   While it was avid outdoorsman and hunters who promoted and push for U.S.'s National Park system.

I realize that some think that if drones were allowed in national parks, that they drone users would stick to the quota of 1 per acre and only to be flown on all saints days and every other Monday LMAO.

I note that almost all countries have included national parks as NFZ, so what does this tell us, that although not one single report of  tree hugger chaining himself/herself to a tree railing gate etc, the world agreed that drones would not be allowed to fly in our national parks, while I see once again Americans boasting of tremendous size of their national parks, they conveniently ignore every other country who happens to be smaller almost to the extent of demeaning them, but I suppose that a country that’s citizens carry less than 10/15% passports shows that they may not realize there is a big world outside the US.

It would make common sense that NFZ would be placed at National parks after all it is not allowed without permission for maned craft to fly at such low heights over such parks, what the yanks have failed to work out is, there is not a ban on drones in national parks, in fact we have seen hundreds of films videos of drones capturing footage inside national parks, but what regulation is telling drone users is if you want to fly in national parks you must have A a license B provide a risk assessment to protect people and property C have SOP , we think it’s ok to get licensed to drive to fish etc so for those wishing to fly in national parks it is quite possible.
Just two weeks with permission I flew in a national park in Lanzarote Spain , it wasn’t trying or taxing getting permission, there were still many restrictions as to where I could fly and restrictions regarding using photography for monetary gain, but everything that was restricted made complete common sense and the need to preserve and protect their park and their children’s heritage was great, and I believe it’s important for all to respect this, they are not and I wouldn’t insult them by calling them Tree Huggers, they are guardians for all who wish to view and use their heritage in a manner they see fit.

To those who believe that everyone except drone flyers is a tree hugger, well that clearly shows their ignorance and a complete lack of respect for their fellow man, there are some who think they can do anything they like but never manage to do anything who whinge whine moan groan and constantly throw their toys out of the pram when things don’t go their way,  they live in the wake of those who are genuinely progressive and manage to live without trampling on their fellow man .

What some don't realize is U.S. National Parks banned all drone use.
"National Park Service bans drone use in all national parks"

"Jarvis said that the new rules are only temporary and will prohibit drone use until the agency can figure out a policy to serve the parks as well as the visitors. Of course, the Park Service notes that the process of figuring out drone-related regulations could “take considerable time.” Any permits already issued for unmanned aircraft have been suspended and need to be reviewed and approved again.".  Typical bureaucratic speak for foot-dragging.  

What videos have been done were already taken, are being done Illegally, or by special exceptions.  Requiring permission of Park's administrator, not FAA.  

Given that you can have TFRs in specific areas for specific times, it is a telling pathetic argument being made that all National Parks, entire Park area has to be deemed NFZs 365-days per year.   Additionally a pathetic argument that one countries policy preference for protecting their Parks via NFZ, means other countries have to enact same policy.  When in NFZs and TFRs are merely fields in a database that can be added, modified, or deleted.  

I note that the tree hugger theory has now taken a back seat, I don’t think for one minute either the rest of the world followed America’s lead on a drone ban from national parks or indeed the other way around, what is most likely is people with a decent amount of intelligence and savvy decided to protect people and property from something that had very little business in flying around national parks cause more disruption than needed, they also probably realized that the opportunities for flying drones in airspace that exceeded the space of national parks by a hundred fold, so they were not to worried that on this earth there would ever be a shortage of space to fly drones, the truth of the matter Is drone flying as a hobby has by far the biggest playing pitch of any hobby in the world bar none, being excluded from certain places will not make its playing pitch much smaller in the scheme of things, yes it’s easier to fly if you live in a rural area but so be it , it’s also much easier to ride horses, we don’t see to many horses in apartment blocks, maybe it’s because city dwellers would find it to confining in the space they live, and the same can be said of many sports and hobbies, but one thing drone flyers can’t complain about is not having the space to fly, because they have more space than any other hobby sport etc, of course if they want to fly from their armchairs they might find it better to take up another hobby .
Maybe it would be more relevant putting up complaints about NFZ in the US on the FAA website, seen as they are directly responsible for implementing them .