Get The Facts: DJI’s Relationship with Anzu Robotics

Recent news reports, along with a letter published by two U.S. Congressional Committee members (referred to as the “Letter”) addressed to Anzu Robotics, have inaccurately depicted the nature of DJI’s relationship with Anzu Robotics (Anzu). Below we address the issues raised specifically to DJI and clarify the facts.

• Anzu Robotics is not an affiliate of DJI. The connection between the two companies is a technology licensing agreement, through which Anzu acquired specifications related to the DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise products (and associated intellectual property). This is a standard - and legal - arrangement, commonly practiced by companies across various industries.

• DJI has long positioned its products as versatile drone platforms, empowering individuals and businesses to develop new solutions. One of the earliest examples of this approach dates back to 2018 when DJI and Skycatch partnered to deliver custom drones for a customer. DJI’s Software Development Kit (SDK), in particular, has played a crucial role in fostering the local drone ecosystem in the U.S. American developers and businesses have leveraged DJI’s SDK to create new software solutions across various applications, including agriculture, search and rescue, and more. This is why the software used on Anzu’s drones shares some similarities with DJI’s flight apps; it was built using this SDK. However, it is important to note that Anzu is responsible for overseeing its updates and data policies.

The Letter also referenced examples that supposedly illustrate risks the U.S. government “has repeatedly found”, pertaining to DJI drones. These claims, however, continue to lack evidence and perpetuate misinformation about DJI’s business. We address these inaccuracies directly below:

• “DJI maintains close ties to the PRC government, though DJI long sought to obscure this fact. On its official blog, DJI has alleged that it “did not receive any Chinese government investments. However, contrary to DJI’s false statements, an IPVM/Washington Post investigation revealed that “at least four PRC government entities have invested in DJI”
  
  This is simply inaccurate. The four PRC government entities mentioned in the Letter are not DJI’s investors. As noted before, DJI’s majority ownership rests with its founding partners. No government entity or representative sits on DJI’s board or has any role in its operations. Currently, the remaining investors are from the private sector with the exception of less than a 6% stake and under 1% voting rights that are owned by several state-owned banks, municipal investment funds, and capital management companies. None of which are related to the People’s Liberation Army or the Central Military Commission. These enterprises are the same as any institutional investor that purchases stock in a private company, regardless of where that company is headquartered. The equivalent investment in the United States would be a state-backed pension fund investing in U.S. based technology companies. The investment is neither subsidy nor control and represents the same investor goal as every other interest. 
  
  
• "DOD found that “systems produced by [DJI] pose potential threats to national security” and designated DJI as a Chinese Military Company”

DJI is not a military company. We have no connection whatsoever with the military, and we see no reason to be named as a Chinese Military Company by the DOD. In fact, we remain one of few drone companies to clearly denounce and actively discourage the use of our drones in combat. DJI does not manufacture military-grade equipment, nor does it pursue business opportunities for combat use or operations. Our distributors, resellers, and other business partners have committed to following this policy when they sell and use our products. They understand that we will terminate our business relationship with them if they cannot adhere to this commitment. 

To add, the Letter refers to “‘potential’ threats”, highlighting that no actual evidence has been found despite these claims being perpetuated against DJI in the U.S. for years.

• “The Treasury Department prohibited U.S. investors from investing in DJI on human rights grounds after determining that “DJI has provided drones to the Xinjiang Public Security Bureau, which are used to surveil Uyghurs in Xinjiang”

As expressed in the past, DJI has not engaged in any activities, including sales distribution and product development, that violate or abuse human rights. Like other manufacturers, we do not have control over how our products are used as they are available off-the-shelf. However, we have demonstrated – through years of investments in product safety and security initiatives – that our products are developed for peaceful and civilian use only. Additionally, our internal procedures dictate that we do not do business with parties on U.S. sanctions lists, including those in China, even when there is not a U.S. nexus to such transactions. 

• “The Commerce Department added DJI to its Entity List (banning U.S.-based companies from exporting technology to the company; DOD suspended procurement of off-the-shelf DJI drones and the Department of the Interior has grounded all DJI and PRC-manufactured drones that it purchased.”
  
  These unfortunate decisions were based on the same inaccurate claims made against DJI that we have addressed earlier in this article. None of these claims have been substantiated with evidence and all appear to be part of an ongoing protectionist and political campaign against DJI in the U.S.

These developments not only reflect a misunderstanding of how drone technology works, but also overlooks the detrimental impact such baseless accusations have on thousands of jobs and businesses within the U.S. - as captured in recent news articles (see below).

DJI’s drones are market leaders because they consistently deliver superior performance in terms of safety, reliability, power, and ease of use. For over a decade, DJI has been instrumental in supporting the growth of the U.S. drone ecosystem. We firmly believe that the industry’s full potential can only be realized in a market that remains open and competitive, where drone operators have the freedom to choose the best products to suit their needs.

+++++++++++++++

Get The Facts is a content series where we raise, and address, allegations and misconceptions lodged against DJI in the public domain. We invite you to view other articles in the series by visiting ViewPoints, The Official DJI Blog.