I said "Sorry I am not a fan of this process.  It's turning into a disaster and if something doesn't change soon, it's going to get worse.  DJI has not implemented this properly; there's a better way to do it."


Sean said "Oh well we will have to agree to disagree. It's not DJI's fault that binding owners are not undoing the biinding before they sell or return equipment, though perhaps they could stress the need to do so more strongly and prominantly.
If I could establish the "srrong" binding on my drones I would do so, simply to ground them if they are lost or stolen."

Sean, are you thinking that DJI intended the binding process to ground "lost or stolen" drones or do you believe this is an [un]intended consequence of the binding process which may not have been forseen by DJI?  Before I answer your question, just wanted to understand the thinking and make sure we are on the same page with the approach because I do not support any effort by DJI to "place a lien" on personal property without taking the correct legal steps.

It is my understanding that the intention was, and is, to ground lost drones that the insurance has paid out on.
However I do not know if grounding stolen drones is an intended or unintended side-effect/benefit but I have seen people request the ability to ground stolen drones and I, for one, consider the grounding of stolen drones to be a good thing.

My GM vehicles have the same feature. If the vehicle is reported stolen, OnStar will lock it down so it either doesn't move or has a max speed of only 20mph. And getting GM to remove those restrictions is a whole process. And I prefer it that way.

Honestly, I feel that the DJI implementation of this concept is perfect. In my opinion, it is a good theft deterrent in the sense that thieves won't be able to profit off of the crime. I also believe that if anybody does research into buying a used DJI drone and, after coming across the many many threads about not being able to bind it to their account for this reason, still decides to purchase one, it's on them for not heading the warnings.

I do think it would be nice to have some sort of feature that when the drone is turned on after it is stolen, it could report a general location to either the owner or DJI so that authorities can actually help.

I do think it would be nice to have some sort of feature that when the drone is turned on after it is stolen, it could report a general location to either the owner or DJI so that authorities can actually help.

blue_canyon21 Posted at 4-19 07:12
My GM vehicles have the same feature. If the vehicle is reported stolen, OnStar will lock it down so it either doesn't move or has a max speed of only 20mph. And getting GM to remove those restrictions is a whole process. And I prefer it that way.

Honestly, I feel that the DJI implementation of this concept is perfect. In my opinion, it is a good theft deterrent in the sense that thieves won't be able to profit off of the crime. I also believe that if anybody does research into buying a used DJI drone and, after coming across the many many threads about not being able to bind it to their account for this reason, still decides to purchase one, it's on them for not heading the warnings.

i respect your opinion and thanks for the comments; but you're joking, right?

i beg your pardon but this isn't even close to what dji is doing:

"What if someone steals your car? It’s a question we hear a lot — “can OnStar locate my car?” We sure can. Once law enforcement confirms your vehicle has been stolen, our Advisors use GPS to help authorities find your vehicle. But that’s just the beginning. When it’s safe, we’ll work with authorities to remotely slow it down.*  And with Remote Ignition Block™,*  we can also remotely prevent a thief from restarting your vehicle. If your vehicle is stolen, the OnStar theft protection team has your back. And your car. Our Advisors work with law enforcement to help you get your vehicle back quicker and safer. "

Sean, to answer your question, if DJI did something like this, I would be elated.  e.g. No drone is locked or blocked unless there is a valid police report.

Again, I don't believe the DJI implementation is meant to be a theft deterrent which is why the situation has gone so horribly wrong.  No disrespect blue but it's actually the opposite of perfect, it's a disaster.  Mobile phones used to be locked down and it took laws to correct that disaster.

And I havent even begun to chime in with my "government conspiracy locking theories" which I won't do.

The Saint Posted at 4-19 07:49
i respect your opinion and thanks for the comments; but you're joking, right?

i beg your pardon but this isn't even close to what dji is doing:

I am quite willing to accept that theft deterrence was not intended but it is, or could be, a useful, unitended, side effect.

If you think about it, if a bound drone can not, long term, be flown by any DJI account other than the binding account then news of that feature will gradually spread and I think act as a theft detterent.

Say you have a bound drone and it gets stolen, 3 months down the line DJI contact you and say,
" We have been contacted to ask if your drone can be unbound, Joe Bloggs claims to have bought it from Pete Postman. If you sold the drone can you please undo the binding?", are you going to undo the binding or tell DJI it was stolen?
Word of the need to ask and check if a drone is bound will gradually disseminate and reduce the market available to thieves.

I can't see a problem with that. It is without doubt unfortunate for those honest folk who get lumbered with a bound brick but eventually folks will know to ask and check before they buy.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-19 06:56
It is my understanding that the intention was, and is, to ground lost drones that the insurance has paid out on.
However I do not know if grounding stolen drones is an intended or unintended side-effect/benefit but I have seen people request the ability to ground stolen drones and I, for one, consider the grounding of stolen drones to be a good thing.

i would like this ability as well but it has to be implemented correctly so i cannot be abused or so that it doesn't abuse the casual buyer who has done nothing wrong.  the reason why i believe this isn't the dji intent because they are professionals and they wouldn't have implemented such a weak and ineffective process with all kinds of catastrophic side-effects.  too many people are legitimately getting drones they cannot use because of a hidden feature not designed to stop them are actually getting in their way.

i don't know of a single product that doesn't contain user sensitive data that can be remotely locked by a third party without official paperwork (such as a title, a claim, or a lien).

maybe dji should periodically reset the binding process like they do with the account logon.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-19 07:32
I do think it would be nice to have some sort of feature that when the drone is turned on after it is stolen, it could report a general location to either the owner or DJI so that authorities can actually help.

not me.  i don't want my location to be reported to the dji or the authorities every time i power up my drone.  if they implement this feature, the owner can enable or disable it.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-19 08:14
I am quite willing to accept that theft deterrence was not intended but it is, or could be, a useful, unitended, side effect.

If you think about it, if a bound drone can not, long term, be flown by any DJI account other than the binding account then news of that feature will gradually spread and I think act as a theft detterent.

so that's how it works, when enough people get hurt, the lessons will be learned?

dji is not in the business of deterring crime and if they want to help, this is not helping.  drones will always be stolen just like apple iphones will always be stolen, regardless of the strong hi-tech.  what dji is doing is hurting too many honest people.  those in the know are preying on those who don't know something that isn't obvious.  at the same time, such a rogue process in my drone that can be abused is diminishing the value of my dji drone as well.

imagine getting a drone for christmas only to fine out it won't fly unless you get a subscription.  or it won't lift off without remote id but you have to apply for and get approval to get a remote-id transmit license.

dji has lost a ton of sales because people still believe geofencing means the customer will likely be unable to fly his drone when and where he wants to.  nothing is further from the truth.  add to that, your drone can be locked out at any point.....how is that a good thing?

as i mentioned, i'm not a big fan of government laws.  however, we might need a law for this one.

Oh well we look at the same thing and see it in entirely different ways, I doubt we will change each other's mind.
As for periodic resets of binding, that would IMO total undo the value of binding.
What would be the point of binding if x months down the line the binding is automatically undone and Mr Finder or Mr Thief can gain full use of the drone, they might as well get full use straight away.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-19 09:08
Oh well we look at the same thing and see it in entirely different ways, I doubt we will change each other's mind.
As for periodic resets of binding, that would IMO total undo the value of binding.
What would be the point of binding if x months down the line the binding is automatically undone and Mr Finder or Mr Thief can gain full use of the drone, they might as well get full use straight away.

what would be the point?  you are right, there is no point to that if binding were used to stop thieves but let's be realistic, the whole point of binding is not to stop thieves.  binding is for something else.  instead maybe people try to use it against the thieves but not only is it ineffective but also it's frustrating for the honest citizen.  in america, we don't believe in hurt a bunch of people just to try to stop a few.  as far as we know, the thief have already figured out a way around this.  all i am asking is if dji want to stop theft, do it the right way, the professional way.  not some sloppy inconsistent process that scoops up a whole bunch of honest buyers in a web they can't get out of.  unbind the drone every month and if you drone is lost or stolen, the owner can log in and uncheck the box and prevent the unbinding permanently starting with the next upcoming month.  otherwise if the drone is not lost/stolen or the owner suddenly dies, his drone doesn't automatically go to heaven with him.  can we agree on that?

blue_canyon21 Posted at 4-19 07:12
My GM vehicles have the same feature. If the vehicle is reported stolen, OnStar will lock it down so it either doesn't move or has a max speed of only 20mph. And getting GM to remove those restrictions is a whole process. And I prefer it that way.

Honestly, I feel that the DJI implementation of this concept is perfect. In my opinion, it is a good theft deterrent in the sense that thieves won't be able to profit off of the crime. I also believe that if anybody does research into buying a used DJI drone and, after coming across the many many threads about not being able to bind it to their account for this reason, still decides to purchase one, it's on them for not heading the warnings.

If you guys are just going to have a conversation amongst yourselves and discount what others say, why not just do it in the DMs?

Seems to me the copied the approach Apple take with their activation lock and thats enjoyed by a lot of people.    I for one would love the ability to lockout previous drones I have owned that were stolen.  

blue_canyon21 Posted at 4-19 19:01
If you guys are just going to have a conversation amongst yourselves and discount what others say, why not just do it in the DMs?

i responded to your comments and i invite others to participate as well.  unfortunately many people feel this feature is designed to deter crime or prevent the stolen drone from being used but i don't think that's the intent of dji.  blue, the gm methods works because there are two key components:  police involvement and proof of ownership.  dji has neither.  imagine if anyone could file a police report on your car and call it stolen and gm would disable your car.  imagine if gm would refuse to re-enable your car unless they could convince the person on the other end of an email to make it happen.  the gm method is superior because it doesn't leave innocent victims in their wake, all in the name of safety and security.  so i agree with you 100% the gm process is very good and it cannot be applied to the dji drone because there is no title denoting ownership and as far as dji is concerned, a police report is pretty worthless when it comes to reporting/tracking/retrieving stolen drones.  are we even sure dji has the capability to lock/unlock drones remotely or do they depend on whether the [previous] owner will comply?

DAFlys Posted at 4-19 23:22
Seems to me the copied the approach Apple take with their activation lock and thats enjoyed by a lot of people.    I for one would love the ability to lockout previous drones I have owned that were stolen.

unfortunately it's a bad copy since the apple method doesn't leave innocent customers holding the bag.  people enjoy the apple model because there's a path to resolution.  dji left out that part.  a mobile phone contains a tons of sensitive and valuable information so it's a necessity to protect the data, not the hardware.  dji smart remote has no pin to unlock (autel does) and as far as i know, you cannot login online and control your devices.  i love dji but they dropped the ball on this one; which is the point of my thread.  any device that calls back to hq for authorization to activate should be able to be blocked, that's a given.  after that, it's in the wind imo.  just tired of seeing the numerous complaints and you cannot really tell the thief from the honest customers.  that's a problem, dji.

".....unbind the drone every month and if you drone is lost or stolen, the owner can log in and uncheck the box and prevent the unbinding permanently starting with the next upcoming month.  otherwise if the drone is not lost/stolen or the owner suddenly dies, his drone doesn't automatically go to heaven with him.  can we agree on that?"
I can see sense in your thinking but do not think that periodic unbinding is the answer. I don't touch some of my drones for months at a time, I would bet there are other folks in the same boat.
Depending on where the drone is stored such a drone could be stolen during the stroage period and its theft not noticed. Or, the pilot could be away from home, without the drone, for an extended period of time and the drone stolen during their absence.
Whatever DJI choose to do some people will suffer and someone will argue against it.
I, for one, am not arguing that grounding stolen drones was the intention of the binding but would you agree that it is a consequence of it if the owner of the binding account does not unbind the drone?

I disagree that DJI do not provide a path to resolution. It appears, from several threads, that, if asked, they (DJI) do contact, or try to contact, the owner of the binding account.

If that owner does not respond, or responds in the negative, are DJI supposed to take independant action and, if they can, unbind the drone.

If the owner of the binding account discovered that that had been done I can forsee DJI geting sued.

As for buyers of returned drones being caught out because they are sent a bound drone then that, in my opinion is the fault of the seller. I would hope that most sellers have, by now, cottoned on to the fact that a returned drone must be checked for binding before a refund is issued.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-20 08:35
".....unbind the drone every month and if you drone is lost or stolen, the owner can log in and uncheck the box and prevent the unbinding permanently starting with the next upcoming month.  otherwise if the drone is not lost/stolen or the owner suddenly dies, his drone doesn't automatically go to heaven with him.  can we agree on that?"
I can see sense in your thinking but do not think that periodic unbinding is the answer. I don't touch some of my drones for months at a time, I would bet there are other folks in the same boat.
Depending on where the drone is stored such a drone could be stolen during the stroage period and its theft not noticed. Or, the pilot could be away from home, without the drone, for an extended period of time and the drone stolen during their absence.

yes i agree the solution is not going to be perfect and someone will complain regardless of the method.  which is why i suggested making it officially so there is little wiggle room:  police reports and title to ownership comes first to mind.

for example, if the owner does not respond, the person in possession of the drone should be able to send the drone to dji and dji can unlock it.  for personal property like a drone, in america, you ARE the owner if you have possession of personal property and there is no proof otherwise (i.e lost/stolen/title/etc).  if your drone is lost or stolen, you can remedy this with an official report either to dji or the police and stake your claim.  otherwise, your property will eventually become someone else's property if you don't claim it.  just like a football or flashlight or a dslr camera, if you don't claim it, it's not yours.  it belongs to the person who [legally] possesses it.  if dji does not get notified they shouldn't take action after a certain period they should unbind it unless somebody tells them not to.  maybe there is a better solution.

i agree it's the seller's fault.  apple provides very good instructions on what to do before you sell your iphone.  granted it's to protect your personal details and not exactly to make a good experience for the buyer but does dji tell sellers and merchants how to traffic used drones and how to properly dispose of used drones?  if you click on "reset all" does it unbind?  perhaps over time, people will learn but unlike a couple hundred dollar used mobile phone when this last used to happen frequently, a thousand dollar drone is a tough pill to swallow and a hard lesson to learn.  right now, it seems like zombie drones are starting to make the rounds as victims pass along their "problems" to the next unsuspecting target.

If theft is classed as legal possession then your law is an @ss, just because the owner hasn't come further does not or certainly should not give the thief legal possession, thats just wrong, there could be many plausible reasons why the legal owner hasn't come forth.

I also agree with Sean's take on this 100%.  I for one am very happy with the way it is at present. There should be no reason for a legal owner that sold the item to contest this, i cant see them doing it just to be an idiot, but perhaps stupidly they may think that they will get it back if they say they didn't sell it? perhaps they may have duped their insurance company into paying up and had to keep up with the ruse? those are to 2 reasons i can think of as to why a legal owner may decline unbinding,

If a legal buyer cannot get DJI to unlock it then thats that as far as DJI is concerned, the legal buyer could put in a criminal complaint, maybe under a fraudulent sale, but even the police cannot make the seller unbind it and as per DJI's policy, they probably still will not unbind it themselves even with a crime report.

I am happy with that because i know to make sure a used DJI drone is unbound before money changes hands, I also know that i have to unbind a drone before sale.

Bashy Posted at 4-20 17:42
If theft is classed as legal possession then your law is an @ss, just because the owner hasn't come further does not or certainly should not give the thief legal possession, thats just wrong, there could be many plausible reasons why the legal owner hasn't come forth.

I also agree with Sean's take on this 100%.  I for one am very happy with the way it is at present. There should be no reason for a legal owner that sold the item to contest this, i cant see them doing it just to be an idiot, but perhaps stupidly they may think that they will get it back if they say they didn't sell it? perhaps they may have duped their insurance company into paying up and had to keep up with the ruse? those are to 2 reasons i can think of as to why a legal owner may decline unbinding,

i said "you ARE the owner if you have possession of personal property and there is no proof otherwise (i.e lost/stolen/title/etc)" which means you can't be a thief and legally possess something you stole.  if you didn't steal it and you have it and nobody claims it then in many places, it's yours.  unlike a car or a house or some other valuable items that has an established "legal" owner which is usually decided by a deed or a title or a contract with a description or serial number, often for a unique or specific item.

i would like to make this clear so you understand and i really shouldn't have to say this but here goes:  if you steal a drone from your neighbor's house and try to say it's yours just because you have it at your home, you're a thief and you don't own that drone.  if you see a drone laying in someone's backyard and you climb the fence and you pickup that "lost" drone and you take it home and try to claim it's yours, it's not.  if a guy walks up to you in an alley and says he has a drone he can sell you for $50 and you buy it and try to claim it is yours but you later find out it is reported stolen, it's not yours.  can't believe i have to explain this to you.
https://thebusinessprofessor.com ... and-abandoned-items

Bashy Posted at 4-20 17:42
If theft is classed as legal possession then your law is an @ss, just because the owner hasn't come further does not or certainly should not give the thief legal possession, thats just wrong, there could be many plausible reasons why the legal owner hasn't come forth.

I also agree with Sean's take on this 100%.  I for one am very happy with the way it is at present. There should be no reason for a legal owner that sold the item to contest this, i cant see them doing it just to be an idiot, but perhaps stupidly they may think that they will get it back if they say they didn't sell it? perhaps they may have duped their insurance company into paying up and had to keep up with the ruse? those are to 2 reasons i can think of as to why a legal owner may decline unbinding,

i forget to ask, how do you make sure a used drone that you buy online is unbound before you pay for the drone?

The Saint Posted at 4-20 18:31
i forget to ask, how do you make sure a used drone that you buy online is unbound before you pay for the drone?

In the year 2023, I guess a used drone buyer could do a quick Google search.  If someone is not Google savvy, they could ask a friend, neighbor, co-worker or relative to Google Search for them.

https://forum.dji.com/thread-279734-1-1.html

But at the end of the day, you can't fix stupid.  You just can't.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/05/ ... ollars-in-2022.html

The Saint Posted at 4-20 05:59
unfortunately it's a bad copy since the apple method doesn't leave innocent customers holding the bag.  people enjoy the apple model because there's a path to resolution.  dji left out that part.  a mobile phone contains a tons of sensitive and valuable information so it's a necessity to protect the data, not the hardware.  dji smart remote has no pin to unlock (autel does) and as far as i know, you cannot login online and control your devices.  i love dji but they dropped the ball on this one; which is the point of my thread.  any device that calls back to hq for authorization to activate should be able to be blocked, that's a given.  after that, it's in the wind imo.  just tired of seeing the numerous complaints and you cannot really tell the thief from the honest customers.  that's a problem, dji.

If I buy a second hand apple product thats locked theres no path to recovery.    It's such a problem that most second hand machines are going to scrap and not being recycled.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/ ... ock-right-to-repair   

The Saint Posted at 4-20 18:31
i forget to ask, how do you make sure a used drone that you buy online is unbound before you pay for the drone?

Thinking about it that is a good question, it has raised several thoughts in my mind * but my immediate answers to such a question would be. (In what follows "drone" = drone and or controller as applicable.)

If the purchase was to be made face to face, I would, in the meeting, ask to see the device management page in their app, if the done showed as bound I'd ask them to unbind it, if they can't or won't then no sale.
If they DO unbind it and it is a 'smart controller' I would then ask them to log out of their app and permit me to check, via my logging into the app with my details, the device management page in 'my' app. If the controller was not 'smart' and a phone etc. was needed, I would go through the same procedure and check using my 'phone' and obviously my login. *

If buying via an internet market place etc. I would ONLY use a market place that offers guarantees/protection to a buyer.
Using eBay as an example, I would ask the seller via, and this is important, eBay messages - all sale pertaining communication needs to be via eBay messages, for a photo that clearly showed that the drone was not bound, no clear photo no bid. If the seller then sent bound equipment there would be an immediate request to unbind the drone, if they do not unbind the drone then I would open a "not as described" case.
If the drone happened to be sold in the "for spares or repair" category but was advertised as could be switched on I would still make the same request. If such a photo was provided VIA EBAY MESSAGES then that forms part of the contract and if the drone turned up bound there would be an immediate request to unbind the drone, if they do not then I would open a "not as described" case.
In the UK an eBay "not as described" return is at the seller's expense and the refund includes the original carriage charge to the seller i.e. the seller ends up "out of pocket".

* This made me wonder could the seller, knowing the serial number etc.,  subsequently rebind the drone? Thinking about that I think the answer is ONLY if their app can connect to the drone. From my recollection of binding a mini 2 there is no provision to type in serial numbers i.e. the app 'reads' the serial numbers from the connected drone.

The Saint Posted at 4-20 18:31
i forget to ask, how do you make sure a used drone that you buy online is unbound before you pay for the drone?

The way you said it gave me the impression that the item was yours no matter what...

I would never buy a used drone online unless i can go collect it or its from Amazon

Bashy Posted at 4-21 07:01
The way you said it gave me the impression that the item was yours no matter what...

I would never buy a used drone online unless i can go collect it or its from Amazon

yeah everything is mine no matter what.  c'mon.

it's getting harder and harder for the consumer to buy a used drone while having to follow all the various laws and ordinances in their country along with the barriers that have been erected by the manufacturer.  no other drone has such issues other than the dji drone and i understand it's good to have these features but it all goes sour when something goes wrong and not even the manufacturer is able to help and the customer is left holding a brick.  i don't buy drones on the secondary market either but i certainly sell drones on the secondary market, so i care because i don't want to get tripped up.  very few people would understand the process of checking the drone purchase as sean layed out and it's a strategy, not a process.  i'll ask again, when the owner uses "reset all" does that clear the binding?

The Saint Posted at 4-21 07:22
yeah everything is mine no matter what.  c'mon.

it's getting harder and harder for the consumer to buy a used drone while having to follow all the various laws and ordinances in their country along with the barriers that have been erected by the manufacturer.  no other drone has such issues other than the dji drone and i understand it's good to have these features but it all goes sour when something goes wrong and not even the manufacturer is able to help and the customer is left holding a brick.  i don't buy drones on the secondary market either but i certainly sell drones on the secondary market, so i care because i don't want to get tripped up.  very few people would understand the process of checking the drone purchase as sean layed out and it's a strategy, not a process.  i'll ask again, when the owner uses "reset all" does that clear the binding?

As a seller all you have to do is ensure that the drone and or controller you are selling is/are unbound, plus if you are selling a smart/built-in-screen controller that your flight logs are deleted and you are logged out of the app.

I have no idea about resets as I have not seen anything that offers that.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-21 08:19
As a seller all you have to do is ensure that the drone and or controller you are selling is/are unbound, plus if you are selling a smart/built-in-screen controller that your flight logs are deleted and you are logged out of the app.

I have no idea about resets as I have not seen anything that offers that.

it's not me (the seller) i am worried about.  it's the scammer buyer who will claim the drone i sent him is bound and get a refund he isn't entitled to.

when you reset the iphone and prepare it for sale, all the buyer needs to know is the phone powers up to the welcome screen.  at that point, there are no hidden locked portions within the phone, no secret menus that need to be cleared, or hurdles later to jump over to get your new purchase to perform as expected.  in general.  

The Saint Posted at 4-21 08:39
it's not me (the seller) i am worried about.  it's the scammer buyer who will claim the drone i sent him is bound and get a refund he isn't entitled to.

when you reset the iphone and prepare it for sale, all the buyer needs to know is the phone powers up to the welcome screen.  at that point, there are no hidden locked portions within the phone, no secret menus that need to be cleared, or hurdles later to jump over to get your new purchase to perform as expected.  in general.

From my understanding of what can be seen....Photograph or video the app showing the drone being unbound and make sure that the app's email address is visible. Obviously DO NOT make the email address (complete or even partial) available to the buyer.
Obviously it isn't absolute proof but if you have a good reputation then it should count for something.

Photograph the serial numbers, paper and electronic prior to dispatch and on return, ask the buyer to provide a photograph or screen capture of the "this equipment is bound etc. " warning so that the email-address/serial-numbers are visible and can be compared by the 'selling-site' staff dealing with the dispute. Note by "selling-site" I mean any online selling place.

Yes there are a few scamming buyers but not many I think, also check the buyer's rep. Although I seem to remember it is now difficult to leave negative feedback for a buyer.

I asked for serial numbers if I won an ebay auction and in specific relation to drones the serial number of the drone, controller and batteries.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-21 10:00
From my understanding of what can be seen....Photograph or video the app showing the drone being unbound and make sure that the app's email address is visible. Obviously DO NOT make the email address (complete or even partial) available to the buyer.
Obviously it isn't absolute proof but if you have a good reputation then it should count for something.

good info to know, thank you!

Something I had always wondered about with all the civil unrest in the world going on, and DJI having a record showing they can ground drones in any country  or regions in time of war or civil unrest.

What do we do with our expensive  $3000 plus drones if they become bricks because of the political BS going on between the USA and China,   Does anyone else have this same concern?
would we be able to still fly with the FAA aloft app?
I know it something stupid to worry about but I am OCD  sorry.

Ms Ivy Posted at 4-26 06:57
Something I had always wondered about with all the civil unrest in the world going on, and DJI having a record showing they can ground drones in any country  or regions in time of war or civil unrest.

What do we do with our expensive  $3000 plus drones if they become bricks because of the political BS going on between the USA and China,   Does anyone else have this same concern?

it's a good question.  many state and local governments believe our dji drones can be remotely accessed and controlled, even from china which is not a good thing.  not likely to happen in the near future but you never know how things might turn out should we have a crisis.  at that point, i don't believe other 3rd party apps like aloft and litchi will be useful.

The Saint Posted at 4-26 08:46
it's a good question.  many state and local governments believe our dji drones can be remotely accessed and controlled, even from china which is not a good thing.  not likely to happen in the near future but you never know how things might turn out should we have a crisis.  at that point, i don't believe other 3rd party apps like aloft and litchi will be useful.

That is what thought too.

Ms Ivy Posted at 4-26 06:57
Something I had always wondered about with all the civil unrest in the world going on, and DJI having a record showing they can ground drones in any country  or regions in time of war or civil unrest.

What do we do with our expensive  $3000 plus drones if they become bricks because of the political BS going on between the USA and China,   Does anyone else have this same concern?

If the app and equipment is not connected to the internet how would they become aware that DJI have grounded drones?
I suppose the automated 3 monthly log out might force the need to connect but, as yet, I am uncertain precisely how that log out system works.

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-26 10:00
If the app and equipment is not connected to the internet how would they become aware that DJI have grounded drones?
I suppose the automated 3 monthly log out might force the need to connect but, as yet, I am uncertain precisely how that log out system works.

They could block or disable the GPS capabilities for that region like they did in Ukraine no internet required

Ms Ivy Posted at 4-26 10:35
They could block or disable the GPS capabilities for that region like they did in Ukraine no internet required

I don't see how DJI could do that, to get the drone to do it, surely they would need to communicate with the drone and that's via wifi etc. and if wifi is off.....
Nor can I see them getting the GPS satellites switched off and certainly not the American ones

Sean-bumble-bee Posted at 4-26 14:55
I don't see how DJI could do that, to get the drone to do it, surely they would need to communicate with the drone and that's via wifi etc. and if wifi is off.....
Nor can I see them getting the GPS satellites switched off and certainly not the American ones

Indeed and that is why I asked if this was something anyone else was concerned about DJI drones are the best in the world IMO, But its about the government's playing politics with each other not the consumer. ,it may not be china that takes action on the drones sold in the USA,  I am thinking what the USA is doing with tiktok that could effect this class of hobby.  so anything is possible would be my guess.  

Ms Ivy Posted at 4-26 15:12
Indeed and that is why I asked if this was something anyone else was concerned about DJI drones are the best in the world IMO, But its about the government's playing politics with each other not the consumer. ,it may not be china that takes action on the drones sold in the USA,  I am thinking what the USA is doing with tiktok that could effect this class of hobby.  so anything is possible would be my guess.

Hi,

The U.S. federal government (Department of Defense) isn't playing politics with drones.  It makes sense that the DoD wouldn't want foreign drones and foreign cloud servers collecting data about the U.S. Department of Defense.  It's similar to the Polar and Strava fiascos they had a few years ago with smart GPS watches or fitness trackers.  The only person playing politics so far is the Governor of Florida who wants to be perceived by the public as "tough on China".

I'm pretty sure that Apple watches are still banned by the U.S. military.

https://gadgetsandwearables.com/ ... apos;t%20buy%20just,wearables%20fit%20this%20criteria%20neatly.

DroneApe Posted at 4-26 15:56
Hi,

The U.S. federal government (Department of Defense) isn't playing politics with drones.  It makes sense that the DoD wouldn't want foreign drones and foreign cloud servers collecting data about the U.S. Department of Defense.  It's similar to the Polar and Strava fiascos they had a few years ago with smart GPS watches or fitness trackers.  The only person playing politics so far is the Governor of Florida who wants to be perceived by the public as "tough on China".

so something not to worry about?

Ms Ivy Posted at 4-26 17:14
so something not to worry about?

I wouldn't worry about it.