Sorry I hate to kick a dead horse...... but im trying to determine how the majority of DJI's customer base is feeling about the new geofence.  I honestly think this will iorn out in the end but im trying to get a sample of how most of you guys feel about it.

Please Vote

I agree with DJI's proposed new geo-fence

I partially agree but would like geofence to be only for airports and safety sensitive area

I disagree with geo-fence, and unless changed I will likely drop DJI in the future

I have already dropped DJI and or Cancel'd Orders.

This is a nuisance and I'm on the fence about it... I will make up my mind once the final maps or finalized.

I do not disagree with it per se, I am all for safety, I am pissed with their poor implementation and their even worse follow-up to when they flipped the switch and claimed it was a server glitch...B.S (Bull Shit!) Servers do not randomly glitch in that way and select a line item to disable flight...That was human intervention and frankly it was a test...They proved to whomever it was that was tasking them to prove that it worked..and it did!..
Unfortunately..DJI are too arrogant to even set a post to acknowledge the problem and list a simple set of instructions to the thousands that have had and are still having problems and how to rectify it..It is not difficult to fix, pretty simple actually...Just wish they would man up!

I wrote my concernes here:
http://forum.dji.com/thread-38482-1-1.html

I disagree because:
1. a change in already sold product
2. transfer of power about flight from a device owner to DJI. We bought it, not rented it.
3. possible violation of the presumption of innocence rule in a case of air incident
4. privacy concern - to raise safety and awareness DJI do not need to use server-side self-authorisation. client-sided is enough
5. a purpose of transfer of power in point 2 is not clear. System is easy to obey in a case of use prepaid cc/phone/fake email, so have huge logic hole.
6. i do not trust DJI

Does this GeoFence option totally disable your drone in certain areas or does it just alert you that you are flying in an unsafe / etc. area and let's you fly by acknowledging you realize where you are?

80% of country area will be disabled with a possibility to enable by server-sided mechanism. So you bird will be disabled by default, and enabled on demand, and your 'enable' action will be logged.

I think the majority will be in favor of a DJI option instead of the federal government option.  The geofencing option that allows for unlocking  seems fair.  They will have to make sure its 100% accurate and correctly working before its rolled out.  Below is one reason DJI is doing what its doing.

http://thehill.com/policy/transp ... o-fencing-on-drones
Then heres a company that does it for the home owner

https://www.noflyzone.org/

But now you have it unlocked
Why whould you wish to have it locked?

dacofty Posted at 2016-1-20 03:02
I think the majority will be in favor of a DJI option instead of the federal government option.  The ...

You sound like DJI in the fact youre assuming what folks want..... The polls disagree with you.
The federal government option is coming regardless of what DJI does or does not do.
The United States Government does not pass laws nor regualtions that are reliant on Chinese controlled infrastructure nor networks nor servers..... they never have and never will.  
Thus I'm confused as to why you guys are  reasoning that anything that DJI does is somehow going to influence some federal mandates?
It is my opinion from looking at this data sample, that most folks dont mind geo-fencing around highly sensitive areas (white house) Major airports and exct.  people just dont want a map coverd in yellow zones that they have to rely on DJI to unlock.. That is taking things a bit to far in my book. theres a middle ground here... DJI needs to find it quickly

Hey AlaskanTides.

You need to add an option that i think Many will agree with:

-    I partially agree with Geofence, but DJI needs to be sensible about how they implement it. (current implementation is Very Poorly, if not, thought out at all.

They are currently locking out many, many users, causing endless frustration, and worry among their current user base by having a poor, stealthy, some would even say dishonest deployment of updates.


They need to know that majority of the end users are "intelligent" people.... they cannot treat them like Monkeys in the lab!

dji-p3p1 Posted at 2016-1-20 04:58
Hey AlaskanTides.

You need to add an option that i think Many will agree with:

That is what i was getting at when I said partially agree.... and that middle ground is what I think most of us are looking to DJI to provide. I defiantly agree with you

AlaskanTides Posted at 2016-1-21 01:05
That is what i was getting at when I said partially agree.... and that middle ground is what I thin ...

Cheers AlaskanTides - up-vote for you!

I don't mind the concept behind Geofence. Warning users when they are flying in a potentially dangerous area is great. What I do mind is the implementation. I do not want to have to worry about having internet access in order to authorize a flight. As for authorizing beforehand, I may not always be able to plan ahead as to exactly where I will be flying. I also do not like that my authorizations are logged and stored on DJI servers. There's really no need for that. Simply having the DJI Go app warn users when they are in a restricted area is enough. Also, has DJI even considered the security implications of what they are doing? Say their servers get hacked, or an employee becomes disgruntled, and they set the entire world as a no fly zone and lock DJI out of their servers. All of a sudden all P3s everywhere are grounded until DJI can restore their servers. I wonder how good for business an incident like that would be for DJI?

jmtw000 Posted at 2016-1-20 23:09
I don't mind the concept behind Geofence. Warning users when they are flying in a potentially danger ...

You can talk about hypothetical situations all day long.
What if your bank servers went down and you weren't able have access to your money.
What if the software in your car's GPS had a glitch and it took you on a different route as planned.
What if your cable service had a issue during Super Bowl and you were unable to see the game.
What if you didn't do a compass calibration when required and your Phantom crashed.What if the power went out in your town for a day and you just spent a lot of money on meat.
You can have hypothetical what if's all day long, just go out and enjoy your Amazing DJI product and have fun. If a hypothetical what if ever happened, deal with it then.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-1-20 10:30
You can talk about hypothetical situations all day long.
What if your bank servers went down and yo ...

DJI-Ken,

    You do have a good point. If we "what if" everything all day we'll never have any fun and maybe my hacking/disgruntled employee scenario was a bit of a stretch. But  I just don't understand why DJI needs to have server-side authorizations. Why isn't simply warning the user they're in a potentially dangerous area to fly in enough? It just seems to me that the current proposed implementation of Geo is putting too much power in the hands of DJI to decide where we can and can't fly based on arbitrary zone designations and collecting too much information from the user.

jmtw000 Posted at 2016-1-20 23:54
DJI-Ken,

    You do have a good point. If we "what if" everything all day we'll never have any fu ...

I'm here only as tech support and do not know the how everything was implemented and all the reasons for it.
But it is just a Beta for users to test if they wish to. And i would think the arbitrary zones will be more defined in a final version if and when there is one. I thought the need for your account info is in case there was an incident, they know who that person was.
Also, the information you provide is not kept by DJI, but by a third party verification center.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-1-20 16:30
You can talk about hypothetical situations all day long.
What if your bank servers went down and yo ...

Simple:
- i will take my money from my wallet. Only not wise have all money on bank account.
- i will stop and ask somebody about correct road or buy a paper map
- i will go to the neighborhood, or watch it on the Internet
- i will buy another UAV

But, if Geofence servers will down, my p3 will be bricked. My car will be still able to drive, i will have money in pocket and paper map will work pretty good. And then i can sit in the car and read in newspaper about results of match.

Now, after that, i can open the trunk and fly with Geo-free UAV.

Our Phantoms are our phantoms. We bought it already. And geo is deal breaker. This is not what i paid for.
      
"IF" - Spartans to Philip II of Macedon

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-21 00:23
Simple:
- i will take my money from my wallet. Only not wise have all money on bank account.
- i wi ...

Exactly, in those "what if's" you had a simple solution.
If something were to happen and you could not authorize a zone and fly. Go home and try again the following day.

AlaskanTides Posted at 2016-1-20 08:57
You sound like DJI in the fact youre assuming what folks want..... The polls disagree with you.
Th ...

I am stating the facts that if they do not take a action and try to do it, the feds will and if the feds do it will be alot worse.   Do a search of Senator Schumer and the legislation he introduced.   All I can say is if you dont agree sell yours and try to find one that isnt gonna implement geofencing.  Syma might be a good place to start

DJI-Ken, Or just return DJI product to shop and get product of other brand.Time is money.  It is not 'try next day because we dont care about you. There wil be no simply 'next try', because UAV operator will loose money , customer and reputation by your fault.

Now multiply that in 100 000 or more. This is free market.
Customers are not for DJI. DJI is for customers.

You are here, because customers payed for DJI product. If they change their mind, there will be no DJI. DJI is changing already sold product, so customers may also changie their mind and just return it. In EU we have 2 years for that.
And we do not need to hurry.

AlaskanTides Posted at 2016-1-20 08:57
You sound like DJI in the fact youre assuming what folks want..... The polls disagree with you.
Th ...

And to have accurate poll data you have to do it in more places then this forum, the majority of users more than likely dont come here.  

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-20 11:40
DJI-Ken, Or just return DJI product to shop.

Now multiply that in 100 000 or more. This is free mar ...

I really dont think many have returned theirs or even put up on ebay.  I do understand the frustration behind the geofencing.  DJI will have to have a fail safe in place for the server disruptions.  I see US Ronotics has also added the geo fencing so its only a matter of time before any drone with GPS will have it.  In US its no where near a 2 year return policy maybe 30 days if lucky

dacofty Posted at 2016-1-20 17:46
I really dont think many have returned theirs or even put up on ebay.  I do understand the frustra ...

Just read this topic.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2573923

Many of people cancelled order and sold their DJI products. They just was angry for DJI policy and customer treatment.
This is only of the tip of the iceberg. Now people are disgusted, because it is only beta, but people gone angry when it go live. And then, massive returns and sues will start.

I do not know Your law about 'returns', but in this case You have a change in a key functionality of already sold product. This is deal breaker. You may have other law for that.
And ofcourse, people may join together and sue DJI as a group.

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-20 11:49
Just read this topic.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2573923

I wouldnt doubt a few have but they must be private slaes cause ebay has very very few used DJI Phantom 3s for sale

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-1-20 11:22
I'm here only as tech support and do not know the how everything was implemented and all the reaso ...

DJI-Ken,

    I understand you don't have all the answers and that Geo is currently just Beta. I'm just airing the issues I have with the proposed system as it is in Beta.
    So, the info will be used if there is an "incident". Now, if I just happen to be flying in an "authorization zone" the same day some idiot with a non-Geo enabled UAV decides to do something stupid I get the FAA/law enforcement crawling up my a**. That's just great. And the info being kept by a third party does not make me feel better in the least. The problem isn't that DJI has the info, it's that anyone has the info.

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-20 11:49
Just read this topic.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2573923

That was a great article thanks for posting.  I am ok with the geo fencing but if they attempt to charge to unlock then I would have to change my thoughts.

I wrote it a few times on RCGroup, but i wrote it also here, to make some constructive criticism:

my proposition:
- actual map for everyone
- Geo with client-sided self-authorisation for all (just a checkbox, without logging and net connection)
- Geo with server-sided authorisation (as in current form, to be honest, there is no reason because evasion is easy) only for sensitive areas like airports.
- more information materials about safety added to every DJI copter.

Optional:
- full unlock for operator with UAV VLOS/BVLOS licence.

AlaskanTides Posted at 2016-1-20 08:57
You sound like DJI in the fact youre assuming what folks want..... The polls disagree with you.
Th ...

And if you look over your results of the poll, the majority of voters agree to an extent with geo fencing.  As do I,  I agree airports and other secure areas.  The minority disagree with it.

DJI-Ken Posted at 2016-1-20 10:30
You can talk about hypothetical situations all day long.
What if your bank servers went down and yo ...

What if your bank servers went down and you weren't able have access to your money.


The agreement with my bank is not based on internet access. If it was, and their servers left me unable to access my money they would have to compensate me for any losses. As it stands, I am not forced to rely on an internet connection to access my money. I have credit cards and cash - all which allow me to make purchases with the same vehicle (my money) when I want/need to. I have been at vendors whose credit card systems weren't working... they simply ran the transaction manually.

It should also be noted that personal information on bank servers are located in the U.S. (for U.S customers) and subject to strict privacy laws. DJI is a private, non-US company, Information is not subject to the same laws. The privacy policy currently shows a very low threshold for release of private information to a wide range of individuals.

What if the software in your car's GPS had a glitch and it took you on a different route as planned.


If the vehicle's GPS broke and gave the wrong route, I would still have the option of driving wherever and however I want.

If the system required me to ask the manufacturer permission to drive a certain road or prevented the car from certain roads where I had legal access or prevented the car from driving when I did not have an internet connection, one of two things would apply. If this happened after the sale, the manufacturer would have to repair my system or replace it with one that worked the way it was supposed to when I purchased the car. If the system was designed like that prior to my purchase, I would have the option to buy from a different company. Problem solved.

What if your cable service had a issue during Super Bowl and you were unable to see the game.

I would miss the game or see it somewhere else. I could walk next door and not have to spend over one thousand dollars to buy a TV that worked as it was supposed to. Also, the cable company would eventually fix the service. They would also compensate me for the time I was without service (as they always have). Where the analogy fails is that the cable company did NOT design their service with knowledge that certain areas would always go black during a big game and that users would have to pre-authorize their viewing from a  connected location less than 24 hours in advance.


All of these examples have fairly easy workarounds that allow the user to make their purchase, drive their car or see their game when they want/need to. They also involve compensation from the party with the broken service. I don't see DJI providing  any way to easily circumvent geofence or compensating users for lost time.

DJI should simply offer geofence as an optional opt-in system. Alternately, they could clearly inform current/future purchasers and offer refunds to those who purchased prior to geofence. Mine is in a case right now ready to be shipped.

Doesn't bother me a bit. I quit taking updates at 1.4. I will wait until it all gets straightened out before I update (if I ever do). My bird has the old motors so I doubt I will update strictly for the vibration issue. Now that Geofencing has been introduced I honestly doubt I will update further.

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-21 02:56
I wrote it a few times on RCGroup, but i wrote it also here, to make some constructive criticism:

m ...

Good rational suggestions.

I would add- CUSTOMISED and APPROPRIATE to the LAWS of each country.

IMHO that's the only way geofencing is on any value whatsoever

jrm11 Posted at 2016-1-21 03:00
What if your bank servers went down and you weren't able have access to your money.

Excellently put.
I understand Ken is trying to help (and I think we all appreciate that).

But thus far geofencing has all the hallmarks of a poorly thought out and implemented, company crushing innovation.
A prudent approach would be "after trials and feedback DJI has decided not to proceed with geofencing at this time. We will continue to work with customers and regulators to refine the system until it satisfies the needs of all parties. DJI thanks those who have participated in the Beta testing and invite interested parties to continue to work with us for the benefit of all"

*sigh*

Northofthe49th Posted at 2016-1-19 22:09
I do not disagree with it per se, I am all for safety, I am pissed with their poor implementation an ...

I keep seeing that geo-fencing is just beta, why cant I fly at all in my yard?
I cant opt out, disable, revert to earlier version, or get correction from support.
I believe the idea is sound, but is implemented poorly. Start small and then work up from there. Dont make every dirt runway or abandoned strip a international airport. My house is 4 miles from a small strip in the middle of cotton farms and pecan orchards and cant fly my drone after a app update. I could fly before that and had checked online maps at dji no fly that showed then and now that my home is fine for flying. This is the problem that you try to make informed decisiond with the data supplied by the mfg and then they use something different. Thats false advertising and illegal here in the states.

"Thats false advertising and illegal here in the states."

Wow, you have laws like that in the states? If you bothered to look out your window at the rest of the world it is pretty much the same everywhere, the US of A does not have a monopoly on consumer law.

Kyokushin Posted at 2016-1-20 09:49
Just read this topic.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2573923

i would bet that not nearly as many actually cancelled or returned their quads as said they were going to. Complainers always need a platform and require an audience to be happy.

Rigworker Posted at 2016-1-20 20:58
i would bet that not nearly as many actually cancelled or returned their quads as said they were g ...

i agree with you

dacofty Posted at 2016-1-20 07:40
I am stating the facts that if they do not take a action and try to do it, the feds will and if th ...

That is far from fact.

1) Any laws passed will have to Apply to all drones, not just DJI

2) The federal government is not going to just take DJI's word that the problem is fixed ,,And then simply submit to DJI's Network of enforcement.

When the government passes regulation,   there will be blanket laws for every drone....

The US  government will have direct control over any system adopted and or implemented in the NAS

I don't know how many ways i can paint that picture for you....all DJI is doing is making a sucky situation worse... T
the correct course of action here is to put NFZ's in the sensitive areas and then wait for guidance from the federal government.  (Believe me Its coming).

Now exactly how draconian these rules might be,,, are yet to be seen.... Ultimately the Government is going to have integrate UAV's into the NAS.... Thats exactly what congress told the FAA to do.  At this point its a matter of commerce and economic's.  The sky is not falling.

We all  know federal intervention is coming......... We simply don't want to fight DJI's silliness  while we wait and see what these regulations will be

dacofty Posted at 2016-1-20 07:41
And to have accurate poll data you have to do it in more places then this forum, the majority of u ...

The whole point of a statistical annuluses is to take a sample....
I can't think of a better place for a poll  then on a forum filled with DJI's current client base
These folks are up to date with the products and understand the applications of these products they also know the strengths and weakness of these products.

where would be a better place to poll this exactly? the home and garden section maybe?

Geebax Posted at 2016-1-20 16:48
"Thats false advertising and illegal here in the states."

Wow, you have laws like that in the state ...

hahahahaha. you mean the world isn't flat and we don't just fall into the abyss at the US Border{:3_41:}

next you will be trying to tell me that giant sea monsters don't exist

mike.wildlight Posted at 2016-1-20 10:33
Excellently put.
I understand Ken is trying to help (and I think we all appreciate that).

I like the sound of that...... Where did you get that information.

AlaskanTides Posted at 2016-1-21 13:45
I like the sound of that...... Where did you get that information.

Sadly, just wishful thinking on my part