The federal government’s efforts to restrict specific consumer electronics are beginning to manifest in tangible ways for American consumers. While earlier regulatory actions primarily targeted telecommunications infrastructure, the scope has expanded to include portable consumer devices.
In my latest video, I talk about how I acquired a DJI Osmo Pocket 4P, a compact vlogging camera that currently sits on the list of prohibited items for commercial sale in the United States. I also take a look at the status of DJI’s legal efforts to get themselves off the list.
The Osmo 4P features a one-inch sensor capable of 4K resolution at 60 frames per second and an integrated mechanical gimbal, offering a more streamlined experience than the mobile phone rigs I have used previously.
Because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ban prevents new DJI products from being officially approved for the U.S. market, obtaining the camera required an unconventional approach. A friend purchased the device at retail price while on a work trip in Shanghai and brought it back into the United States in its original packaging.
This highlights a significant gap in the current enforcement; while commercial import for resale is restricted, personal possession and individual transport across the border have, thus far, continued without issue. On the secondary market, this same package is often marked up significantly, with prices reaching nearly $800 on some sites due to tariffs and the scarcity of domestic supply.
There is a specific technical hurdle for those attempting to use these devices domestically. The camera must be activated through a mobile application before it can be used. If the software detects a United States location during this initial setup, the device may refuse to activate. To bypass this, my unit was activated in China before being transported. Once that process was complete, I was able to pair it with my local app and set the interface to English.
For those who prefer to avoid these complications and maintain access to warranty support, companies like Insta360 offer hardware with similar specifications (compensated affilite link) that remains legal for sale in the U.S., though often at a slightly higher price point.
The legal tension surrounding DJI stems from the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, which tasked the Department of Defense with identifying companies linked to the Chinese military. DJI was added to this list, a designation the company has challenged in court. A recent appeals court ruling noted that the government had not provided a public rationale for this classification, as the relevant evidence was classified and never presented to the originating court. The appeals court has now signaled that the government must present documentation to support its claims if the designation is to remain.
However, a more recent legislative development presents an even larger obstacle. The 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law in December 2024, specifically named DJI and Autel Robotics in the legislation. The law dictated that if a required report on these companies was not completed by the Department of Defense within a year of enactment, both companies’ products would automatically be placed on the FCC’s covered list. Because that report was not finished on time, the law forced the FCC to ban both Autel and DJI from the US market. This mandate includes not only drones but also “surveillance equipment.” Because this is a statutory requirement passed by Congress, the FCC does not have the authority to remove these companies from the list on its own.
This leaves DJI products relegated to the grey market for the foreseeable future. While many users are currently bringing these devices across the border from places like Canada or Mexico, or receiving them via international shipping, there is an inherent risk. The government possesses the legal authority to confiscate items on the covered list at the border. While enforcement has not yet reached the point of individual seizures for personal items, the long-term status of these electronics remains uncertain as the legal and political landscape continues to shift.