In a high-profile lawsuit filed recently with the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court, DJI is suing imaging device maker Arashi Vision Inc., better known as Insta360, over six patents covering drone flight control, structural design, and image processing. These technologies are central to product differentiation as drone makers increasingly integrate panoramic capture and more sophisticated software-defined features.

In its complaint, DJI argues that the six inventions were created by former core R&D employees within one year of leaving the company, and that the inventions are closely related to the employees' duties and access to key DJI technologies during their employment. DJI claims the disputed patents are “service inventions,” the rights to which should belong to the former employer under China’s patent law.Insta360’s founder and CEO Liu Jingkang responded to the lawsuit on Weibo on March 23.

“DJI claims that any patents generated by employees within one year of leaving DJI should belong to DJI. We carefully reviewed the patents applied for by these employees during that period. The evidence shows that all ideas and innovations were independently created at Insta360,” Liu posted.

“Regarding the area of most interest — flight control — the only potentially relevant patent is one that lets users achieve an FPV-style ‘building dive’ with a single button press. This was my idea, and I was deeply involved in refining and approving it. Under current flight restrictions, this patent isn’t very useful, so the feature wasn’t implemented. If DJI wanted this patent, they could’ve just asked for it.”

Two of the six patents include a procedural detail likely to carry weight in court. In their China filings, one inventor was listed with a “request not to publish name,” while corresponding international PCT applications disclosed the inventor’s real names under mandatory disclosure requirements. If validated by the court record, that discrepancy could help DJI link specific contested claims to former employees and to work performed on DJI’s drone projects.

In response, Liu said that hiding inventor names is a standard practice to protect employees from corporate headhunting.

Liu also claimed that the company has not used many of its patents, including some of those involved in the lawsuit, and that they are outdated.“Most of the drone-related patent applications involved in this matter were filed four or five years ago. Since then, our product roadmap has changed significantly, and many patents have never been used.”Liu further claimed on Weibo that it is DJI, not Insta360, that has violated patents, including those related to DJI’s 360-degree camera and action cameras.

“We understand why GoPro and DJI sued us — established players hate losing market share. At the same time, many functions and accessories from DJI’s 360 camera and action cameras have been called out in the media as ‘copied’ or ‘strikingly similar’ to Insta360’s. Last year, our team found that DJI’s products could fall within the scope of 28 Insta360 patents — 11 of our hardware and structure patents, eight software-method patents, six control-method patents, and three accessory patents. But we didn’t sue them,” Liu said.

Liu argued that Insta360 refrained from suing DJI over these alleged infringements because, “as a smaller company with limited resources, we prioritize innovation over litigation.”

And he hinted at a potential countersuit, phrased as a “nuclear weapon,” should his company be hindered from developing new products related to the disputed patents, including drones.

Liu said his company must now wait for the legal process to run its course, including evidence collection and investigations.

He said that such disputes are common in the tech industry, and that the company remains focused on launching seven or eight new products this year, including gimbal cameras, microphones, and a drone.

“The bottom line is we respect intellectual property, but we also respect facts, legal procedures, and rulings. We are not afraid of patent lawsuits. We refuse to fight over the same pie; we prefer to expand the market through continuous innovation and earn our place. Litigation is only used as a last resort,” Liu concluded.

The lawsuit comes as DJI and Insta360 push into each other’s strongholds after years of dominance in separate categories. DJI has long held more than 70% of the global consumer drone market, while Insta360 previously commanded over 85% of the panoramic camera market.

Competition has intensified since last year. Insta360-backed drone brand Yingling launched the Yingling A1 panoramic drone in December and reported that China sales exceeded 30 million yuan (US$4.17 million) in the first 48 hours. DJI, meanwhile, entered the panoramic camera market with the Osmo 360 in July, adding price pressure and compressing the room for incremental hardware features.