DJI Ban Fact-Check: Industry Veteran Debunks Viral Myths Ahead of December 23 Deadline

Your DJI drone won’t stop flying on December 23. That’s the core message on the DJI Ban from Vic Moss, President of the Drone Service Providers Alliance, in a new fact-check video aimed at combating the fear and misinformation spreading through the drone community.

With just 24 days until the critical NDAA deadline, Moss recorded a reference guide for anyone panicking about their DJI equipment. His verdict: stop calling it a “ban” and start understanding what’s actually happening.

“Don’t use the word ban anymore, please,” Moss says in the video. “The more accurate word is restriction. There is no ban.”

What December 23 Actually Means

Section 1709 of the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act sets December 23, 2025 as the deadline for a federal security audit of DJI and Autel. The agencies authorized to conduct this audit include the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, NSA, and FBI.

If none of these agencies completes the audit by the deadline, DJI and Autel will automatically be added to the FCC’s Covered List. Here’s what that means in practice:

What Happens	What Does NOT Happen
New drone models requiring FCC licenses cannot be imported	Your current drone stops working
Future products blocked from U.S. market	DJI remotely disables your equipment
New FCC authorizations denied	Existing drones become illegal to fly

“Any future models that require a new FCC license will not be granted that license,” Moss explains. “It’ll be illegal to import them. That’s important. Import.”

The restriction applies to any communications or video surveillance equipment from DJI, Autel, their subsidiaries, affiliates, partners, joint ventures, or companies with technology-sharing agreements.

The FCC’s New Powers

Last month, the FCC voted unanimously to grant itself the authority to revoke existing FCC licenses on a case-by-case basis. This alarmed many drone owners, but Moss emphasizes a critical distinction.

“That does not affect DJI, Autel, anybody right now because they are not on the FCC Covered List,” he states. “December 23rd they may be, but that’s currently right now not an issue.”

Even if DJI lands on the Covered List, any retroactive revocation would be targeted and specific, not a blanket action affecting every consumer drone.

Debunking the DJI Ban Myths

Moss directly addresses false claims circulating at industry events. He recounts hearing that a U.S. drone manufacturer told customers at the Commercial UAV Expo that DJI drones wouldn’t be able to take off after December 23.

“First of all, fact: lie. That’s a lie. 100% a lie,” Moss says. “If the FCC revokes licenses, it will not let your drone take off. It will not forbid your drone from taking off.”

He’s equally dismissive of claims that DJI would remotely disable drones in retaliation.

“Why would a company like DJI do something like that to their customer base?” Moss asks. “Then any other country could fear the same thing. It’s going to hurt their sales worldwide.”

The United States represents roughly 20-25% of DJI’s global market. Deliberately bricking American drones would destroy customer trust everywhere else. It’s simply not a rational business decision.

Why the FCC Probably Won’t Go Nuclear

Moss goes out on a limb with a prediction: FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr won’t retroactively revoke DJI licenses. The reasoning is straightforward.

“90-plus percent of all first responder fleets are DJI or Autel,” Moss notes. “Nobody, even a bureaucrat, nobody in their right mind is going to do something that would shut down first responder fleets.”

He doesn’t mince words about the stakes.

“It will cost American lives. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.”

Fire departments, police agencies, and search and rescue teams depend on these drones daily. Grounding them overnight would create an immediate public safety crisis that no regulator wants to own.

Civil Disobedience on the Table

In a notable moment, Moss reads the Merriam-Webster definition of civil disobedience: “Refusal to obey governmental demands or commands, especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government.”

He’s careful not to explicitly advocate for breaking regulations, but the implication is clear.

“I’m not telling anybody what to do,” he says. “But if that’s something you’re interested in doing, I will say you will not be alone.”

The Bottom Line

Moss’s advice to drone operators is simple: keep buying, keep flying.

“Should I buy a DJI drone? Absolutely 100% yes,” he says. “Buy a DJI, buy an Autel, buy an Anzu, buy a Specta. If you can get them, buy them.”

The video serves as a counterweight to the speculation, fear-mongering, and misinformation that has characterized much of the online conversation about DJI’s regulatory challenges.

“Anybody who says they know exactly what’s going on or what’s going to happen is speculating,” Moss admits. “Some of the speculation is educational speculation. I hope I fall into that category.”

If you want to help, reach out to your Congress folks using the Drone Advocacy Alliance Take Action page.

DroneXL’s Take

Vic Moss isn’t some random YouTuber chasing clicks. He’s an FAA Safety Team Drone Pro, a founding member of the Drone Service Providers Alliance, and someone who has spent years advocating for reasonable drone regulations at the federal and state level. When he speaks, the industry listens.

His message aligns perfectly with what we’ve been reporting for months. We debunked the “drones will be bricked” myth back in September, using the Huawei smartphone comparison that Moss also references. Six years after Huawei landed on the Covered List, those phones still work fine.

The December 23 deadline is real, but it’s a bureaucratic trap, not a security policy. No federal agency has started the mandated audit despite DJI requesting it nine months ago. The company faces potential market exclusion not because of evidence, but because Congress wrote a law that didn’t assign anyone to actually do the work.

Moss’s point about first responders is critical. We’ve documented Florida’s $200 million drone ban disaster, where the state grounded functional public safety drones, provided inadequate funding for inferior replacements, and never published the security analysis that supposedly justified the whole thing. Orlando Police testified that DJI had zero failures in five years while approved replacements failed five times in 18 months.

The human cost is real. As we wrote in our analysis of why a DJI ban means lives lost, this isn’t about corporate profits. It’s about fire departments losing thermal imaging capability, search and rescue teams losing the tools that have saved over 1,054 documented lives globally, and rural agencies that simply cannot afford American-made alternatives priced at 8-14 times more.

The FCC’s October vote to grant itself retroactive revocation authority was alarming, but Moss is right: DJI isn’t on the Covered List yet. And as GOP senators break with DJI hawks, it’s becoming clear that the political consensus for aggressive action is weaker than the China hawks assumed.

The civil disobedience angle is the most striking part of Moss’s video. When a respected industry veteran openly discusses organized non-compliance as a potential response to regulatory overreach, it signals how seriously the drone community is taking these threats.

For now, the message is simple: your drone will fly on December 24. The sky isn’t falling. But the fight over what happens next is far from over.

What do you think about Vic Moss’s fact-check? Are you still worried about December 23? Share your thoughts in the comments below.