DJI Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Insta360 Ahead of Avata 360 Release

DJI Files Patent Lawsuit Against Insta360

DJI has initiated a patent ownership lawsuit against Arashi Vision, the parent company of Insta360, in the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court. The lawsuit, filed on March 23, 2026, targets six patents that DJI claims are rightfully theirs under Chinese intellectual property law.

This marks DJI’s first patent ownership dispute filed in China, as reported by the South China Morning Post. The Shenzhen court has accepted the case. Following the announcement, Arashi Vision’s shares fell by 7 percent, closing at CNY181.15 ($26.23), while the broader Shanghai market declined by 3.6 percent.

DJI has not publicly commented on the lawsuit. The filing comes just three days before the launch of the DJI Avata 360 on March 26, placing DJI in direct competition with Insta360’s Antigravity A1.

Insta360 founder JK Liu responded to the lawsuit on Weibo, disputing DJI’s claims and revealing that Insta360 has identified 28 of its own patents that cover DJI products but has opted not to pursue legal action against them.

Legal Basis of DJI’s Claims

DJI’s legal argument is based on a provision of Chinese intellectual property law that states innovations created within one year of an employee’s departure from a company, if related to their previous duties, are considered to belong to the original employer. DJI asserts that the six patents in question pertain to essential drone technologies, including flight control systems and image processing.

A source familiar with the case indicated that some inventors listed in Arashi Vision’s patent filings requested anonymity, but their identities were revealed in international filings, showing they were former DJI engineers with access to critical technologies during their employment.

Insta360’s Response to the Lawsuit

In his statement, Liu addressed DJI’s claims, particularly focusing on a flight control patent that he argues covers a specific feature: a one-button “building dive” shot for first-person view (FPV) flight. Liu contends that this idea originated from him and was never implemented due to existing flight restrictions. He stated, “If DJI wanted this patent, they could’ve just asked for it.”

Liu also explained that the practice of withholding inventor names in early domestic filings is standard for Insta360 to protect employees from recruitment efforts, with names disclosed later in international filings. He emphasized that this practice is consistent across all of Insta360’s filings.

Insta360’s Patent Portfolio

Liu highlighted that Insta360 has identified 28 patents that could potentially cover DJI products, including hardware, software-method, control-method, and accessory patents. Despite this, Insta360 has not filed lawsuits against DJI, prioritizing innovation over litigation. Liu noted that the company recorded significant growth and revenue in Q4 2025, even amidst competitive pricing pressures.

He indicated that Insta360 would consider using its patent portfolio if its ability to innovate or release products is threatened, particularly if they face restrictions on drone production.

Context of the Lawsuit

Liu drew parallels between DJI’s lawsuit and a recent case involving GoPro, where the U.S. International Trade Commission cleared Insta360 of patent infringement claims. He suggested that established companies often resort to legal tactics to protect their market share, but such strategies are unlikely to succeed in the long term.

Insta360 plans to launch several new products this year, including gimbal cameras and a second drone, indicating a focus on innovation despite the ongoing legal dispute.

Conclusion

The lawsuit represents a significant development in the competitive landscape of drone technology, particularly as DJI’s first domestic patent case in China. The outcome may hinge on the interpretation of the “service inventions” doctrine and the evidence presented in court. As both companies prepare for the launch of their respective products, the legal proceedings will unfold alongside their competition in the market.