A broader policy than a single company
The FCC’s decision to add foreign-made drones and key components to the Covered List is not only about DJI. The new language focuses on where a drone is designed, controlled, or manufactured. That makes this ruling much broader than a company-specific ban.
Under the policy, new foreign-made aircraft and related components face tighter review before they can receive FCC authorization. Existing authorized aircraft are not banned, but future imports, upgrades, and new models may be restricted.
For operators, this changes how fleets are planned and purchased. It also changes the way the industry should think about “alternatives” to DJI.
Why some “DJI replacements” may face the same limits
After the ruling, many voices across the drone community began recommending “DJI alternatives.” One expert suggested the SkyRover X1 as a Mini-class replacement. At first glance, that suggestion makes sense. The aircraft is marketed in a similar size and use category.
But SkyRover X1 is also a good example of why the FCC’s broader wording matters.
FCC equipment filings for the SkyRover X1 list SZ Knowact Robot Technology Co., Ltd., based in Shenzhen, China, as the company of record on related radio hardware. Other public reporting has also linked the hardware and software lineage of the aircraft to foreign-based development and manufacturing activity.
At the same time, the SkyRover website does not identify a parent company, headquarters, or country of origin. The brand page contains only marketing language about innovation and performance, without corporate ownership or location details. For buyers, that lack of transparency makes it difficult to understand who is behind the platform or how it may be affected by federal policy.
Taken together, these facts mean that SkyRover is not immune to the same supply-chain and authorization risks facing other foreign-made systems. If DJI-branded models were removed from U.S. shelves in the future, it is unlikely that closely related or derivative platforms would continue unaffected.
Under the FCC’s rule, any related or successor entity — even if manufacturing shifts to locations such as Malaysia — may still fall under the same review and scrutiny.
Why lawmakers pushed for a broader approach
This approach reflects earlier concerns raised in Washington. During debates over DJI-specific restrictions, some legislators warned that a narrow, brand-only rule could create a constant chase. They argued that technology might re-enter the market through affiliate companies, licensing structures, or newly created labels.
That would leave regulators trying to identify new names as fast as they appeared, while the underlying technology stayed the same.
The broader FCC language is intended to avoid that problem. Instead of asking only “Who sells this aircraft?”, policymakers are asking “Where is it built, supported, and controlled — and what risks follow from that supply chain?”
What this means for U.S. operators
For many sectors, the impact will be significant. Public safety agencies, utilities, inspection teams, agriculture programs, and mapping firms have spent years building workflows and budgets around aircraft that may now face tighter limits on future import or upgrade approvals.
Existing authorized aircraft may continue in service. But procurement planning now must include regulatory continuity and origin assurance as major risk factors.
At the same time, the ruling creates new opportunity and pressure for domestic and allied-nation manufacturers. They may gain market share, but must also meet expectations on capability, price, and availability during a period of transition.
The real lesson from the SkyRover example
The SkyRover X1 is not simply a “buyer beware” story. It is a sign of how the policy environment has changed. Replacing DJI with another foreign-built platform from a brand with undisclosed origins does not resolve the underlying policy risk.
The FCC’s rule signals that the future U.S. drone market will depend not only on features and performance, but also on origin, transparency, and trust in the supply chain.
For operators, the key question is no longer just which aircraft performs best today. It is which ecosystem will still be reliable — and authorized — in the years ahead.
Read more;
Miriam McNabb is the Editor-in-Chief of DRONELIFE and CEO of JobForDrones, a professional drone services marketplace, and a fascinated observer of the emerging drone industry and the regulatory environment for drones. Miriam has penned over 3,000 articles focused on the commercial drone space and is an international speaker and recognized figure in the industry. Miriam has a degree from the University of Chicago and over 20 years of experience in high tech sales and marketing for new technologies.
For drone industry consulting or writing, Email Miriam.
TWITTER:@spaldingbarker
Subscribe to DroneLife here.
