A quiet development with DJI has some implications for Asian 3D printer manufacturers.
I’ve been following the DJI story for some time as it is quite possible similar outcomes might eventually take place for Asian 3D printer manufacturers.
In the US it seems that DJI, by far the world’s leading manufacturer of industrial and consumer drones, is being targeted by authorities. Based in Shenzhen, China, the company’s products are used worldwide and renowned for their ease of use and low costs.
However, while the company faces US tariffs like other firms, there is more afoot in this situation. US authorities fear the DJI drones are somehow spying, which would technically be possible as the company’s servers are in China. Because of these fears DJI has undergone a number of investigations and now faces a sales ban in the US. In fact, the ban was to go in force at the end of the year unless a US security agency undertook a proper investigative analysis. That analysis is apparently not happening.
Even worse, DJI just lost a case where they were declared a “military company” by the US DoD. This effectively seals the company’s fate in the US. Meanwhile, they continue to sell products elsewhere in the
Now we learn that apparently DJI may have been setting up a network of proxy companies in the US in an attempt to circumvent the ban. One of them is said to be FIKAXO Technology, which has a website showing some products suspiciously similar to DJI’s official products.
For US buyers this really isn’t a great situation. DJI’s products are notably better and cheaper than US alternatives, at least at the consumer price point. It’s not good for DJI, either.
Back to 3D printing.
I fear that at some point the US authorities will turn their attention to Asian 3D printer manufacturers such as Bambu Lab and Creality. These companies and others seem to be on the same business trajectory as DJI. In fact, Bambu Lab’s founders actually came from DJI!
While 3D printers might not be spying in the same way as drones, it is theoretically possible to intercept GCODE on its way to the printer. That is, unless certain steps are taken to isolate the 3D printers from offshore cloud networks. But would that even matter to the authorities? DJI took a number of similar steps, but apparently to no avail.
To be clear, there have been no movements in this direction by US authorities as far as I know. But the patterns seem extremely similar.
