DJI Sues Insta360 In Texas Over Luna Pocket Cameras, And Insta360 Fires Back

DJI filed two patent infringement lawsuits against Insta360 on June 11, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, accusing the rival camera maker’s new Luna Pro and Luna Ultra gimbal cameras of copying the design and core technology of its Osmo Pocket line. One suit asserts two design patents covering the Osmo Pocket’s appearance. The second asserts four utility patents covering gimbal control and subject tracking. DJI is seeking a permanent injunction, damages, and a share of Insta360’s profits. Insta360 countersued a day later, asserting five of its own patents.

DJI accuses the Luna of copying the Osmo Pocket’s ornamental design

DJI’s first lawsuit asserts two design patents covering the ornamental design of its Osmo Pocket cameras, including U.S. Design Patent No. D1,072,023, and claims the Luna Pro and Luna Ultra reproduce the elongated handheld body, gimbal arm, rotatable display, scroll wheel, accessory slot, and base port that define the product. The complaint, filed in the court’s Marshall Division, names Arashi Vision Inc. doing business as Insta360, along with affiliated entities Arashi Technologie B.V., Istone Innovation Ltd., and Instone Technology (HK) Ltd.

DJI argues that the Luna cameras “blatantly copy DJI’s patented inventions wholesale” and use “the same product architecture pioneered by the DJI Osmo Pocket.” The company points to Insta360’s own marketing, product teasers, and demonstrations at the 2026 NAB Show, where Insta360 positioned the cameras as direct competitors to the Osmo Pocket. As PetaPixel first reported, DJI introduced the original Osmo Pocket in 2018 and added the rotatable touchscreen with the Osmo Pocket 3 in 2023.

The second suit targets gimbal control and subject-tracking patents

DJI’s second lawsuit asserts four utility patents describing how its pocket cameras work: a single control that switches a gimbal between follow and locked modes, a handheld gimbal with built-in subject tracking and live display, an image-driven motor control method, and a self-contained tracking system that needs no separate phone app. DJI says the Luna line copies the features that make the Osmo Pocket distinct in the market.

DJI is also pressing a willful infringement claim that could raise the damages. “At a minimum, [Insta360 has] had actual knowledge of each of the Asserted Patents and of their infringement thereof no later than the filing and service of this Complaint,” the company writes in its filing. It adds that continued importation, manufacture, sale, and offers to sell the accused products “with knowledge of the Asserted Patents, constitutes willful infringement warranting enhanced damages.” DJI is asking the court to order Insta360 to pay damages, profit disgorgement, and supplemental damages including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, as Android Authority reported.

Insta360 answers DJI with its own patent countersuit

Insta360 declined to comment publicly on June 11, then answered DJI on June 12 with two countersuits asserting five utility patents covering gimbal stabilization, gimbal directional control, camera smooth stabilization, telemetry overlay, and panoramic video stabilization, technologies the company says appear in DJI’s Osmo Pocket, Ronin/RS, Osmo Mobile, and Osmo 360 products. Insta360 says it “categorically rejects” DJI’s claims and frames the countersuit as a direct response.

Sources familiar with the matter told PetaPixel that the Luna series is the product of years of independent research and development, with work beginning in 2020 and earlier products such as the ONE R, the Link Series, and the Flow Series shaping its direction. Insta360 founder JK Liu echoed that account. “Luna Ultra is the result of years of independent R&D, not a response to any competitor’s product,” Liu said, according to PetaPixel’s follow-up report. Liu added that DJI filing on the launch day “speaks volumes.” Insta360 says DJI’s request for a permanent injunction is an attempt to disrupt the Luna Ultra’s launch.

The Luna Ultra reached US shelves DJI’s own cameras cannot

The Luna Ultra launched on June 10, 2026 at $769.99 with a 1-inch 8K sensor, Leica-engineered dual lenses, and a detachable 2-inch OLED touchscreen, reaching US retailers at a moment when DJI’s newest Osmo Pocket cannot, because DJI sits on the FCC Covered List. The lawsuits arrived less than a day after the camera went on sale, which suggests DJI had its case ready and waited for the US launch to file.

That timing matters. DJI’s dual-lens Osmo Pocket 4P remains blocked from official US retail after the FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, acting on a December 21, 2025 interagency National Security Determination, added all foreign-produced drones and “UAS critical components” to the Covered List on December 22, 2025, after finding they pose unacceptable risks to US national security. The standard Osmo Pocket 4 cleared FCC certification before that deadline, but the 4P landed on the wrong side of the cutoff. DJI is challenging the designation in the Ninth Circuit (Case 26-1029) and through a petition for reconsideration at the FCC, where the company remains blocked from new authorizations while non-Chinese manufacturers clear the list. The result is a US gimbal-camera market where Insta360 has open access and DJI does not. A DroneXL footage comparison between the two cameras showed the Luna Ultra’s second lens pulling ahead at longer focal lengths.

The Texas suits extend a rivalry that started in a Shenzhen court

This is DJI’s second patent action against Insta360 in 2026, following a March lawsuit in the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court that claimed six patents covering drone flight control, structural design, and image processing belonged to DJI because former employees developed them within a year of leaving. That earlier case turned on a provision of Chinese patent law that treats such “service inventions” as the property of the prior employer.

The two companies have spent the past year invading each other’s core markets. Insta360 incubated the Antigravity brand and shipped the Antigravity A1 360-degree drone into DJI’s home category, while DJI’s Osmo 360 pushed into Insta360’s 360-camera turf. DJI brought its own competing panoramic drone, the Avata 360, to market shortly after the Shenzhen suit went public. Insta360, trading as Arashi Vision (ticker 688775.SH), debuted on the Shanghai Stock Exchange STAR Market on June 11, 2025, raising 1.94 billion yuan (about $270 million) in the largest STAR Market listing of that year, with shares surging 285% on day one to a valuation above 70 billion yuan ($9.6 billion), capital that funded this expansion. When Insta360 first teased the Luna and said it was not based on DJI technology, the line read as a provocation. DJI has now answered it in court.

DroneXL’s Take

The pattern here is bigger than one pocket camera. For two years I have watched these companies cross into each other’s territory: Insta360 backing a 360 drone aimed straight at DJI’s core business, DJI answering with the Osmo 360 and the Avata 360 in Insta360’s panoramic stronghold. Litigation was the next logical move once both sides had products to defend and a US market worth fighting over. The Luna cameras did not start this. They gave it a venue.

The part I keep circling back to is the role reversal. I have covered DJI’s regulatory fights all year, from the Ninth Circuit petition to the Pentagon’s classified-intelligence filing, and the through-line has always been a Chinese company arguing it deserves due process and a fair hearing in the United States. Now DJI is the plaintiff, walking into a US federal court to assert its intellectual property against a competitor. A company fighting to stay in the US market is using that same market’s courts to defend its inventions. Both things are true at once, and they sit awkwardly together.

There is also a hard tactical truth. DJI cannot sell the Osmo Pocket 4P through official US retail, and Insta360 can sell the Luna Ultra freely. An injunction would do what DJI’s own product cannot: clear a rival off American shelves. The venue choice is telling. The Eastern District of Texas remained the single most popular US patent venue in 2025, with 28.2 percent of all patent cases filed there in the first half of the year. Whether that court sees the design overlap the way DJI does is the open question, not a prediction. Watch the docket in Marshall for an early claim-construction schedule and for how the court treats Insta360’s countersuit. Watch the Ninth Circuit’s Case 26-1029 for whether DJI’s US market access returns at all. If the injunction lands while DJI itself stays blocked from US retail, the gimbal-camera aisle in this country gets decided by lawyers before it gets decided by buyers.

Source: PetaPixel, with reporting from Android Authority and court filings.

DroneXL uses automated tools to support research and source retrieval. All reporting and editorial perspectives are by Haye Kesteloo.