Drone Company Markets Features That Are Illegal, Class Action Alleges

Drone Marketing Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: A consumer is suing drone companies DJI Technology and SZ DJI Technology Co.
• Why: The plaintiff alleges he bought a drone based on certain features marketed by the companies, but found that use of those features is illegal in the United States.
• Where: The class action lawsuit seeks to represent drone-owners nationwide.

A drone owner says he purchased the product believing that he could fly it two miles out of his line of sight based on marketing by the manufacturers; however, he found out that doing so would be illegal, a new class action lawsuit alleges.

Lead plaintiff Joe Kinder launched the class action lawsuit against DJI Technology and SZ DJI Technology Co, LTD on Oct. 20 in a California federal court, alleging the companies deceived him into thinking he could use his drone in a way that he cannot.

DJI is a drone company based in Shenzhen, China. Kinder, a California resident, says he bought a DJI Mavic Air 2 from DJI’s website for $799 in May 2020.

He says DJI touted the specifications for the drone on its website and packaging, inducing him and others to buy the product based on its flight time and other features. DJI represents the distance and video transmission of its drones to be upward of approximately 2 miles, he says.

However, consumers are not informed that the products cannot meet the corresponding flight time advertised because they “cannot legally operate the DJI Products in a manner consistent with DJI’s representations and warranties.” 

The actual flight time and distance/video transmission “requires conditions that are unobtainable to consumers,” Kinder says.

Drone Operation Touted by Makers Illegal Under Flight Regs, Claims Class Action

Under Federal Aviation Administration operational requirements, drone users must keep their drones within sight at all times. Therefore, DJI’s representations and warranties relating to flight time and distance/video transmission are false and misleading, Kinder says.

“For a consumer to operate a DJI drone based on DJI’s representations and warranties would cause the consumer to violate federal law,” he says.

Kinder says there are at least 100 people in the proposed Class and damages caused by the alleged false advertising of the drones exceeds $5 million.

He’s looking to represent anyone in the United States who purchased a DJI drone  on or after Oct. 20, 2017 to now, plus a California subclass. 

Kinder is suing under California consumer and competition laws, for breach of warranty, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation. He’s seeking certification of the two Classes, an injunction, restitution, fees, costs and a jury trial.

In recent years, DJI Technology also faced a class action lawsuit alleging a software update to its “Phantom 2” critically damaged the drones’ functionality.

The class action follows a drone lawsuit filed against the makers of the Onagofly F115 drone, alleging the drone was deceptively and fraudulently marketed as well with a lower quality camera than promised. 

Do you think the drone manufacturer should make it clear you can’t let it out of your sight in the United States? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by Pratik H. Shah of Shah D’Egidio, APC and John Christian Bohren of Bohren Law, APC

The DJI Technology Drone Class Action Lawsuit is Joe Kinder et al., v. DJI Technology et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-01791-JM-MSB in the U.S. District Court Southern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• $15M Awarded$15M Award in Lawsuit Over E-Cig Battery Explosion Injuries
• Life Alert Continues Automatic Charging After Its Services Are Canceled, Says Class Action
• Linksys Routers Sold at Walmart 900% Slower Than Advertised, Class Action Alleges
• HP’s Software Update Made Printers Incompatible With Other Ink Cartridges, Class Action Alleges