America's Drone Industry Is Trying To Ban the Competition
Chinese camera drones are the most popular worldwide. American drone manufacturers argue that's a national security threat.

American lawmakers, backed by the drone industry, are looking to ban Chinese-made consumer drones. Like the proposed ban on TikTok, Chinese drone bans have been justified by fears of Chinese surveillance, but the real motivation seems to be protectionism: American companies are trying to edge out their foreign competition.
Earlier this year, Congress passed the American Security Drone Act as part of the military budget. The law bans federal agencies from buying drones from any company based in China and gives the Department of Homeland Security the power to declare other drone manufacturers "national security risks."
Several states also issued state-level drone bans last year. Mississippi required state agencies to buy American-made drones, while Arkansas and Florida outright banned state agencies from using Chinese-made drones. After Florida's ban took effect in April 2023, police and rescue services scrambled to replace their drone fleets which had cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The federal Countering CCP Drones Act would go even further, putting the Chinese company DJI on the Federal Communications Commission's list of untrustworthy suppliers. That move would immediately ban new DJI products from being approved for import, and might pave the way to ground existing drones, according to DJI.*
About 90 percent of hobby drones in America are made by DJI—as well as 70 percent of the industrial drones and over 80 percent of first responder drones—so a ban would force hundreds of thousands of Americans to give up their expensive flying cameras.
"Communist China is using their monopolistic control over the drone market and telecommunications infrastructure to target Americans' data and closely surveil our critical infrastructure," the bill's sponsor Rep. Elise Stefanik (R–N.Y.) said in a statement earlier this month. There is no evidence that DJI drones transmit data to the Chinese government.
The Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), a prominent nonprofit representing drone manufacturers and users, opposes Stefanik's ban on consumer drone usage. But the association wants to ban government agencies from buying new Chinese-made drones and push them to transition to American-made alternatives.
"Really, what we are focused on is the domestic supply chain for [unmanned aerial systems]," or UAS, says AUVSI spokeswoman Chelsie Jeppson. "If we are reliant on drones for critical and sensitive operations that come from another place…and if something were to happen where we could not get them securely or use them at a time when we need them the most, then that would be a supply chain issue for the United States."
The news site DroneXL criticized AUVSI for claiming to oppose "immediate" Chinese drone bans while supporting a Utah bill that would immediately ban public agencies from buying Chinese- or Russian-made drones.
AUVSI Government Affairs Manager Elizabeth Sila says that her only engagement with the Utah bill was a single email, of which she provided Reason with a copy. The email both supported the ban on drone procurement and opposed the idea of creating state-regulated "drone highways."
Jeppson emphasizes that there is a difference between procurement and usage. "We do support a movement away from their immediate procurement, but we don't want to ban agencies from using drones that they've already purchased," she tells Reason.
AUVSI issued a white paper in 2023 calling on Congress to use tax incentives, grants, and tariffs to stop China from "flooding the U.S. market" with cheap drones "to the detriment of U.S. manufacturing and global competition."
The Shenzhen-based company DJI was and still is the undisputed leader of the consumer drone revolution. Its Phantom quadcopters kicked off the camera drone trend in 2013, and DJI continues to control over 70 percent of the global market share for consumer drones. Its biggest competitor, Autel Robotics, is also based in China.
American companies simply haven't been able to keep up with DJI's cheap, reliable, and user-friendly products. Camera manufacturer GoPro tried to break into the drone business in the early 2010s but discontinued its Karma flying camera after disappointing sales numbers and performance issues, including drones literally falling from the sky.
Other American drone makers have focused on government contracts rather than consumer products. Skydio has "effectively tapped-out of the consumer and prosumer space," according to drone blogger Chris Fravel, while BRINC markets entirely to first responders.
And they've spent increasingly large amounts of money on lobbying. Skydio went from a lobbying budget of $10,000 and six registered lobbyists in 2019 to a $560,000 budget and 24 lobbyists in 2023, according to OpenSecrets.org, a campaign finance data platform. BRINC spent $240,000 on lobbying in 2023.
DJI has also jumped from spending $390,000 on lobbying in 2016 to $1.6 million in 2023. The company recently hired three new lobbying firms after DJI's former lobbyists dropped the company over some lawmakers' threat to boycott lobbyists for Chinese interests.
The U.S. government has gotten increasingly aggressive against Chinese companies. In 2018, the U.S. military banned troops from buying off-the-shelf drones over cybersecurity concerns. The next year, Congress specifically banned Chinese-made drones for military use. In 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce banned American companies from selling parts to DJI over concerns that the Chinese government was using DJI drones for domestic surveillance and human rights abuses.
In January 2024, a few days before the American Security Drone Act passed, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the FBI issued a joint statement pointing out the risk of Chinese drone manufacturers handing over data to China's government.
DJI insists that its products do not collect or transmit data without the user's consent. The Shenzhen-based drone manufacturer points to several outside security audits of DJI products by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Interior, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Kivu Consulting, and Booz Allen Hamilton.
Another concern is that Chinese companies could remotely disable drones to give China a wartime advantage. That concern is more grounded in reality. DJI's FlySafe feature has long prevented its drones from being flown in restricted airspace, and DJI quietly added large parts of Syria and Iraq to the restricted zone in response to Islamic State attacks.
Autel Robotics recently implemented its own flight restrictions, including not only active war zones such as Ukraine and Israel but also Taiwan, an island whose independence China does not recognize. DJI, meanwhile, has been hit with criticism for not preventing its drones from being used by the Russian and Ukrainian militaries.
These restrictions are easy to get around. Several websites offer cheap software for jailbreaking the DJI app. And there's a simple way to avoid getting hit with new flight restrictions: Don't connect the drone to the internet. Autel Robotics actually advised users in conflict zones not to download any new updates, which is not the behavior of a company that wants to enforce Chinese government dictates.
DJI even rolled out a line of "Government Edition" drones in 2019 that would not connect to the internet, in order to assuage data security concerns. The Defense Department internally cleared those drones for use after reverse-engineering their source code, then walked back its approval after it leaked.
"The nature of the attempts to ban Chinese drones are that if you look at a lot of the efforts, it's 'no Chinese parts, no Chinese software.' So, we would have to really produce a much more expensive drone," Adam Welsh, head of global policy at DJI, said in an interview earlier this month. "Frankly, if you use an iPhone, it's using Chinese parts, and it's manufactured in China. There's a lot of sensitive traffic that goes over people's iPhones. So, I think that's a real problem with this effort."
*CORRECTION: This article initially stated that the Countering CCP Drones Act would ban DJI drones from using American radio waves entirely.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Ass a part of the American Security Drone Act, Congress-slimes should pass an anti-Treason-dot-cum cummenters provision, providing that sore-in-the-cunt cuntsorvevaturd cummenters should be SEVERELY whipped with wet noodles!!! Because OH MY GOVERNMENT ALMIGHTY, they ALWAYS drone ON AND ON AND ON about Saint Babbitt and Spermy Daniels and Dear Orange Leader and ALL sorts of shit!!!! ENOUGH with the droning, all of ye cuntsorvevaturd cummenters!!!
The baffling part is Reason’s cries about “but the real motivation seems to be protectionism”. Do they somehow have it in their heads the Union of State’s wasn’t created for protection of the USA or what?
Yes. A foreign made drone ban is most likely just show boating but it’s no more show boating that this attempt to paint de-stain on ‘protecting’ the USA from importing bad foreign policy. There should be some standards of imports like US communication encryption. A small standard that would avoid the possibility of a foreign surveillance hack. Protecting the USA on the global scale is EXACTLY why the Union of States was assembled to begin with.
How about “Protecting the USA on the global scale” from USA decreased standards of living caused by HIGH TAXES (including tariffs) and excessive regulations (including importation regulations) imposed on us by our Ruling and Drooling Classes of Asses?
#FreeTradeForFreePeoples
So STOP gov spending!? I agree.
Once upon a time Tariffs was the only tax needed and that is what made the USA so great from the very beginning. As-if it’s not just common-sense to tax the USA’s global protection on the global market.
Good points, low tariffs as a sole or nearly-only source of money for a SMALL Government Not-So-Almighty would be GREAT! Let’s get small!!! (Steve Martin-went-a-fartin’ for POTUS!!!)
When the USA was founded we (and I mean that in the whole of the nation at that time, not that I was there with them) were the third world nation with no labor and environmental laws that europe used for cheep labor. There was no protectionism, just a tarriff to pay for things like upkeep of ports and keeping access to them safe and clear. The idea of protective tarrifs was one of the reasons the War of Northern Agression was fought. Four Score years after the revolution the nation was becoming an industrial manufacturer and big northern business wanted to keep the agrarian south as a slave market to American Made Goods and not have to compete with the stronger and higher quality european goods. Now we our industries don’t want to compete with the new third world industrial nations with no labor and environmental laws that are making the cheep stuff. Funny how it all comes around in time.
Seriously? Is Reason actually pretending that China isn’t an aggressive totalitarian state, and geopolitical adversary?
Is Reason pretending that China doesn’t install spyware and worse in hardware it sells to the West? Backdoors in Huawei routers, keyloggers in Tiktok?
Is Reason pretending that it’s not a genuine national security concern if we end up losing various industries to a geopolitical adversary?
This article is fundamentally unserious.
“Is Reason pretending that China doesn’t install spyware and worse in hardware it sells to the West? Backdoors in Huawei routers, keyloggers in Tiktok?”
Are you pretending that you KNOW that they are doing ANY such things? Got any links, to any sources other than bums living under bridges?
If not, then I have to conclude that… Your post is fundamentally unserious!
An excellent source which includes a huge number of references for fact checking is Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans.
https://thenationaldesk.com/top-videos/fentanyl-crisis-deliberate-attempt-by-china-to-weaken-us-new-book-says-blood-money-government-accountability-institute-president-peter-schweizer-shipped-distribute-funding-chinese-banks-alleges-master-plan-deliberate
Fentanyl crisis deliberate attempt by China to weaken US, new book says
The USA exports alcohol and cigarettes across the globe. Is the USA then deliberately trying to weaken the world? Or are the Chinese doing what we are NOT doing, and deliberately holding victims down, and FORCING them to imbibe fentanyl and-or other drugs?
Vodafone Found Hidden Backdoors in Huawei Equipment
Can TikTok Really Log Your Keystrokes? Yep, the TikTok Keylogger is for ‘Troubleshooting’
This is particularly a concern because it’s entirely possible to implement backdoors in hardware, such that you’d never know they were there without dissecting the chips with electron microscopes and reverse engineering what they do. You can even bury a second processor inside your main processor in a CPU, that just monitors what the main processor is executing, and waits for a specific circumstance to take over and implement malicious code.
The threat of hardware manufactured under the control of strategic adversaries in enormous.
Here’s a fairly high level description of the hardware threat.
Chip Backdoors: Assessing the Threat
One of my college majors was computer engineering, which is why I’ve never really trusted the use of general purpose computers in secure applications like voting. They are fundamentally insecure devices even when manufactured by friendly sources.
When manufactured by adversaries? The risk is insane.
Whoa, some of this does sound scary! Thanks!
The Chinese government looks like it might be running scared of the exact same things in USA hardware…
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/25/chinas-new-guidelines-will-block-intel-and-amd-chips-in-government-computers-ft.html#:~:text=China%20introduced%20new%20guidelines%20aimed,Chinese%20solutions%2C%20the%20report%20said.
No, I dont think they are ignoring the potential danger from China But, they made the point quite well in the article on how Vietnam went from commie shit hole to capitalist powerhouse in short order that cutting them off isn’t the way to make it all work.
The Soviet Union fell, partialy becuse we (and I don’t mean me personally along with Reagan and company, it’s meant in the sense of America as a whole) outspent them in the cold war but mostly because the soviet people saw what capitalism made available to the poorest of our people and wanted that shit for themselves. It was Victoria’s Secret and Levis that won that war.
China is being a tougher nut to crack but cutting them off makes their government stronger and we want it to weaken. Their people need to experience our decadent western ways and desire that change at home for the communists to fail. Acting like we think they have fucking cooties isn’t going to make that happen.
In the end, as much as we may hate to say it, Disney may be the death of world Communism. For every plot or charachter they change in a movie to make the Chinese governement happy they show a thousand instances of how capitalism makes even the poorest of our people seem filthy rich to them. How long can they keep their people in the dark if we keep dealing with them? I know they can keep them in the dark a lot longer if we don’t deal with them.
“There is still no public evidence the Chinese government has actually spied on people through TikTok.”
From https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/tech/tiktok-ban-national-security-hearing/index.html
More from the same source…
“TikTok may collect an extensive amount of data, much of it quietly, but as far as researchers can tell, it isn’t any more invasive or illegal than what other US tech companies do.
“According to security experts, that’s more a reflection of the broad leeway we’ve given to tech companies in general to handle our data, not an issue that’s unique or specific to TikTok.”
You are citing a source which itself is compromised by its ties to China and the CCP. Sorry, try again.
Also, those reports don’t even address the issue of the CONTENT that China pushes in the U.S. (drivel and pro-CCP) while banning it in China in favor of educational and patriotic content.
Wake me up with the government decides to actually do something about the Chinese tech risk in our military equipment and weapons.
There seem to be valid concerns, yes… https://www.americansecurityproject.org/us-defense-supplies-china/
On the other hand, sometimes we impede the production of USA military hardware for supply-chain “virtue signalling”, making much sound and fury about nothing!!! If essential rare-earth materials are available ONLY from China, whatchagonna do? NOT build the needed hardware?
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/07/pentagon-suspends-f-35-deliveries-china-00055202
From there, import below…
“We have confirmed that the magnet does not transmit information or harm the integrity of the aircraft and there are no performance, quality, safety or security risks associated with this issue and flight operations for the F-35 in-service fleet will continue as normal,” F-35 Joint Program Office spokesperson Russell Goemaere said in a statement…