DJI is publicly rallying its American customers against a Federal Communications Commission proposal that would cut off imports and sales of drones the agency itself approved. In a post on X on the afternoon of August 7, the drone maker urged operators who rely on hardware like the Matrice 400 or the DJI Dock 2 to tell the FCC how the restrictions would affect their operations and their communities before the comment window closes on September 2, 2026.

I have followed this docket since the FCC opened it on July 21, and this is the first time DJI has pointed its customer base straight at it. The company published a companion post on its Viewpoints policy blog the same afternoon and is directing commenters to the Drone Advocacy Alliance, which has stood up a step-by-step filing guide. The X post had drawn roughly 24,000 views by Saturday morning.

The Proposal Treats Thermal Cameras, LiDAR, Spray Drones, And Docks As Military Hardware

Public Notice DA 26-758, released on July 21 and opening PS Docket 26-189, proposes to prohibit the continued importation and marketing of previously authorized foreign-made drones and critical components on the Covered List that fall into seven capability-based categories the FCC defines as military-grade.

The notice reaches drones weighing 55 pounds or more on takeoff, agricultural spray platforms covered by the FAA’s economic poison rules, anything carrying a thermal imaging sensor, anything carrying LiDAR, docking stations, aircraft specially designed to incorporate a defense article, and swarming systems under a definition broad enough to include drone light shows.

Marketing in FCC usage covers advertising, distribution, sale, and lease. Under the proposal, affected products already authorized for the U.S. market could no longer be imported or offered for sale, and covered replacement components would dry up with them. Drones already in American hands keep flying. The agency proposes a 180-day wind-down after Federal Register publication and exempts Blue UAS Cleared List hardware, Buy American domestic end products, imports for federal government use, and equipment brought in for commercial testing and product development. DroneXL covered the full seven-category proposal when it dropped, and the Federal Register publication on August 3 started the 30-day comment clock that runs out on September 2.

DJI Frames The Proposal As A Reversal Of The FCC’s Own Position

DJI calls the proposal a reversal because the FCC said in December 2025 that adding drones to the Covered List blocked new authorizations only, leaving previously approved models free to be imported and sold while owners kept flying the aircraft they already owned.

That December assurance came with the Covered List action itself, which is why the Osmo Pocket 4 never reached U.S. shelves while the Matrice 400 stayed on them. In May, the commission went further and extended a waiver letting previously authorized foreign drones receive firmware and software updates through at least January 1, 2029. Then on July 21, the same agency proposed shutting the sales channel for a large slice of that same equipment. The Drone Advocacy Alliance calls it a “total reversal.”

DJI’s appeal went out on its X account and its Viewpoints policy blog, where the company writes that the proposal could “amount to a ban on future sales of certified and currently available products.” DJI points out that the categories sweep in the FlyCart delivery platform, agricultural drones, enterprise aircraft, and dock stations, civilian tools with no weapons role. The company continues to challenge the underlying Covered List action in the Ninth Circuit, where Case 26-1029 is pending.

Two disclosures belong here. DJI has helped fund the Drone Advocacy Alliance, and DroneXL has been a DAA partner since June 2024. The scope critique depends on neither relationship: the seven categories sit in the FCC’s own notice for anyone to read.

The FCC Predicts A Minor Economic Hit And Asks Commenters To Prove Otherwise

The FCC’s notice tentatively concludes that the prohibition “would not have substantial economic and supply chain impacts,” reasoning that recreational pilots rarely fly what it calls military-grade hardware and that domestic manufacturing is stronger at the high end of the market.

That reasoning collides with how American drone programs are actually equipped. Thermal sensors are the standard cameras on the aircraft fire departments fly to find missing hikers at night, and docking stations are the backbone of the Drone as First Responder programs that cities like El Paso and Plano have spent millions building, as DroneXL reported earlier this week.

The agency has asked for exactly this kind of evidence. The notice requests data on fleet counts, replacement costs, inventory already inside the country, and shipments en route. Filing takes minutes through the FCC’s express comment system: enter proceeding number 26-189, select the docket name when it appears, and write your story. The Drone Advocacy Alliance action page walks through both the quick text option and the attachment route, and the campaign asks commenters to cover three points: how you use drones, why the tools matter, and what the restrictions would cost your operation. Everything filed becomes public record, so leave out phone numbers and anything business-confidential.

DroneXL’s Take

The comment record is the only lever most operators will ever hold in this proceeding, and I can tell you from direct experience that this FCC reads its docket: the agency’s July 17 notice in the companion proceeding cites DroneXL’s own reporting in its footnotes. A record that fills up with fleet inventories and replacement invoices forces the commission to answer them in any final order. An empty record ratifies the FCC’s tentative conclusion that nobody gets hurt.

Yes, DJI is talking its book. This is the company’s most direct appeal to its American customers since the Countering CCP Drones Act fight in 2024, and it lands while DJI has a case pending against the same agency. None of that makes the underlying point wrong, because the scope problem lives in the FCC’s own text. A definition of military-grade that captures a battery-swap enclosure and the thermal camera on a search and rescue aircraft functions as a market removal wearing a security label. I made that argument on August 5, before DJI said a word.

The pattern worth remembering is Remote ID. The FAA’s original proposal required every drone to transmit its position over the internet, pilots buried the docket in comments, and the final rule shipped as broadcast-only. Agencies move when the record leaves them nowhere else to go. That took tens of thousands of filings on a rule touching every pilot in the country. This docket has a smaller constituency and a shorter clock, which cuts both ways: fewer voices can dominate the record, and silence is more conspicuous.

Two dates matter. Comments close September 2. DJI’s Ninth Circuit challenge sits behind everything and could reshape the Covered List foundation this proposal stands on. Between now and then, don’t be the operator complaining next spring about a ban you had six weeks to contest on the record. If a thermal drone or a dock earns your living or finds your county’s missing people, the FCC just asked you, in writing, what losing it would cost. Answer.

Sources: DJI Viewpoints, Drone Advocacy Alliance, FCC Public Notice DA 26-758

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