The release is smaller than the announcement makes it sound. On Tuesday the US Federal Communications Commission said it would once again allow new models of Chinese toys to be imported, six months after it completely banned new foreign-made drones. The relief is real, but it’s so tightly defined that the word ‘toy’ does almost all the work, and most things sold as toy toys won’t clear the bar.
To qualify, the drone must weigh no more than 150 grams, fly only in an area where you can see it at a distance of 100 meters or less, carry no communication or network power, have no camera or sensors capable of surveillance or data collection, and remain aloft for more than 10 minutes.
That is a straightforward and unforgiving list. It describes a device that can do little other than fly in a circle where its operator can see it, which is exactly the point: the FCC has exempted the drone category from being able to objectively inspect anything.
The logic comes from the Pentagon. The FCC said it is acting on a Department of Defense determination that there is no national security risk posed by what it calls nonsensical, low-risk toys, which lack the range, endurance, hearing, payload, communication and data-gathering capabilities of real drones.
TNW City Coworking Space – Where your best work happens
A workplace designed for growth, collaboration, and endless networking opportunities at the heart of technology.
In other words, the safety concern was not the airframe as such; it was what a capable drone could carry, see, store and transmit. Take that away and what’s left, by the Pentagon’s reckoning, is harmless.
The latter is one of the most important trade-offs in consumer electronics. In December, the FCC moved to ban the importation of all new types of foreign-made drones and key components, naming China’s DJI and Autel and posing an unacceptable risk to national security.
The modus operandi was as deliberate as it was deliberate: under the National Defense Authorization Act, the US security agency was required to complete a review of DJI by the end of December, and when it was not, the company was automatically added to the FCC’s Covered List, preventing new products from being approved for import and sale.
That has left DJI, which controls most of the global consumer drone market, under pressure from both sides, blocking new US sales while Beijing separately bans drone sales in the Chinese capital. Existing DJI drones with prior FCC approval remain legal to own and fly; New models can enter the market.
A serious problem is an exemption that does not affect supply. The United States has decided that it does not want Chinese drones, but it has not built the capacity to replace them, and the dependence goes under the airframe.
China controls a large share of the rare earth magnets and drone batteries that any domestic manufacturer would need, meaning that a ban on Chinese drones does not automatically ban American ones.
The toy-drone carve-out is a small acknowledgment of how the dress code collides with reality at the cheaper end of the market, where the sub-150-gram novelty was never a threat the policy was written for.
The release is also a quiet acknowledgment of how dull the original metal was. The sleep bar on new foreign-made drones, automatically triggered when the review deadline ended, swept everything from professional camera mounts to new palm-sized devices without distinguishing between them.
The Pentagon’s determination effectively acknowledges that risk assessments are stronger than where the device is assembled. Drafting that concept into stricter standards would be more protective than a country-of-origin ban, but it also reveals how much of December’s action was driven by process and deadlines instead of carefully sorting out which devices are truly at risk.
Industry observers have been quick to test the new line against original products. The installation of the expert noted that even the smallest consumer model of DJI, the sub-150-gram Neo, may not be suitable, because it carries a camera, one feature that does not strongly exclude it.
If the drone is marketed as a small device, suitable for beginners and falls outside the definition of a toy, the practical reach of the carve-out is small: it reopens the market for spinning new things and little else, which may be the exact goal.
So the door is open to crack, in such clear terms that observers have noted that even small real drones can fall without it. The FCC has not reversed its drone policy; cut the edge, admitting that a flying toy without a camera and a 10-minute battery is not a matter of national security.
The tough questions, about who makes the capable drones America says it wants and where the parts come from, stay where they are.
