The FCC has proposed banning the import and sale of products from nine companies — Cogito, Fikaxo, Lyno Dynamics, Skyhigh Tech, Spatial Hover, SZ Knowact, WaveGo, Xtra, and XAG — saying they pose an "unacceptable risk" to US national security (Engadget; FCC). The agency believes these companies are taking DJI drones and cameras, putting new brand names on them, and selling them in the US to get around restrictions put in place in December 2025.

Think of it like a recalled car being repainted and sold under a different dealership's name. The underlying product is the same; only the label has changed.

That December rule added all new foreign-made drones to something called the Covered List. The Covered List is a register the FCC keeps of communications equipment it considers a national security risk. If a product is on the list, it cannot be imported or sold in the United States. DJI, the Chinese drone manufacturer, was the company most affected. But the December rule applied only to new drone models. Devices that had already been approved for sale stayed on the market. The current proposal targets that gap, covering already-approved equipment the FCC believes is actually DJI hardware resold under different names (Engadget; FCC).

The FCC had previously proposed $25,000 fines against the same nine companies for ignoring the agency's questions about whether they were selling Covered List products (Engadget). This new proposal takes that enforcement a step further.

This would be the first time the FCC uses a power it gave itself in October 2025. At that time, the commission voted to allow itself to ban devices from Covered List companies even if those devices had already been approved for sale (Engadget; The Verge). Until now, that power existed on paper but had not been used against specific products.

The FCC is accepting public comments for 30 days and has asked for "specific evidence" about its conclusion that the nine companies are selling rebranded DJI products (Engadget; FCC ECFS).

DJI told Engadget it was disappointed by the action and pushed back on the national security reasoning. The company said concerns about its data security "have not been grounded in evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market" (Engadget).

The regulatory chain of events is worth walking through. The Covered List lets the FCC block equipment it considers a national security risk from being imported or sold. In December 2025, the agency expanded the list to cover all new foreign-made drones. In October 2025, the FCC voted to give itself the ability to go back and ban devices that had already been approved — closing a gap that would otherwise let restricted products keep selling under older approvals. The current proposal uses that retroactive power for the first time.

The rebranding allegation connects all of this. If the FCC is right that these nine companies are taking DJI hardware, giving it new brand names, and selling it as if it were not on the Covered List, then the retroactive ban is exactly the tool meant to stop that. The 30-day comment period asking for "specific evidence" suggests the commission is building a formal case rather than just making a point.

For people watching the broader tension between the US and China over technology, drones have become one of the most tightly controlled product categories. The December 2025 ban was broad. This proposal goes deeper, reaching products that were already on store shelves. Businesses that use drones for inspections, farming, mapping, or public safety should treat the Covered List as something that could keep growing — not something settled. The retroactive side of this adds a particular kind of uncertainty: equipment that was legal to sell yesterday might not be tomorrow.

DJI's response frames the situation in familiar terms — security claims made without public evidence on one side, protectionist outcomes on the other. That is a fair policy debate to have, but it does not change the practical reality for US buyers and sellers. The FCC has the authority, has already used it for new products, and is now testing whether it can reach back to old ones. The comment period and the evidence standard the FCC has set will determine how quickly this proposal moves toward becoming a final rule.