DJI and Insta360 Enter Patent Lawsuit Over Vlog Cameras

DJI and Insta360 have entered a patent infringement lawsuit over selfie stabilization cameras. On June 11, 2026, DJI filed a lawsuit in the United States alleging that Insta360’s latest model, the Luna Ultra, infringes on two design patents and four utility patents related to its own Osmo Pocket 3. Insta360 immediately countersued, claiming that DJI infringes on five of its patents related to gimbal and image stabilization technology. Based on coverage by PetaPixel, this article organizes the arguments and background of the lawsuit from both companies.

The lawsuit filed by DJI first concerns design rights. It claims that elements of the Luna Ultra’s body design—such as the neck connecting the body to the gimbal arm, the scroll wheel and recording button, and the rotating display—infringe upon design patents from the Osmo Pocket series. In a separate utility patent lawsuit, DJI points out that some of the gimbal tracking technology it developed has been improperly appropriated for the Luna Ultra.

DJI is seeking a permanent injunction to ban sales of the Luna Ultra, along with damages “no less than a reasonable royalty,” disgorgement of profits Insta360 has earned from the Luna Ultra to date, and additional damages due to willful infringement.

Insta360’s countersuit, meanwhile, is broader. The company claims that DJI’s Osmo Pocket series, as well as the Ronin series, Osmo Mobile series, and Osmo 360, infringe on its patents related to “gimbal stabilization, gimbal direction control, smooth camera stabilization, telemetry overlay, and panoramic video stabilization.” Insta360 further argues that the core technology of the Luna Ultra traces back to its own Link series webcams and Flow series gimbals, and that DJI’s infringement claims are unfounded.

Engadget reached out to both companies for comment but has not received a response as of now.

Strategic Implications of the Lawsuit

The legal battle between the two companies has strategic implications that go beyond a simple patent dispute. Of particular note is DJI’s position in the U.S. market. In December 2025, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) added DJI to its “Covered List,” effectively prohibiting DJI from selling new foreign-made drones or cameras within the United States.

To circumvent these regulations, DJI launched a new brand called “Xtra” to sell the Osmo Pocket 4. The fact that DJI is seeking a permanent injunction against Insta360 suggests it aims to prevent Insta360 from expanding its market share in a way that compensates for DJI’s own sales restrictions. If a court bans sales of the Luna Ultra, it could create a situation where neither DJI nor Insta360 can sell new products in the U.S. market—a balanced outcome. This can be seen as a major motivation for DJI to bring the lawsuit.

For Insta360, the risk of having its Luna Ultra, a leader in the fast-growing vlog camera market, blocked from sale is extremely significant. Compared to DJI, which maintains its sales network through the Xtra brand, Insta360 is not subject to FCC regulations and can freely sell in the U.S. market. It is speculated that DJI has turned to legal means to eliminate this asymmetry.

Core Technical Issues

At the heart of DJI’s utility patent claims is “tracking technology” in gimbal-equipped cameras. The face and object tracking algorithm implemented in the Osmo Pocket 3 is achieved through hardware-software coordination and has a broad patent scope. The fact that Insta360’s Luna Ultra offers similar functionality could become a point of contention.

The “gimbal stabilization” and “panoramic video stabilization” cited by Insta360 in its countersuit are technologies the company has accumulated over many years through its Flow and Link series. Whether DJI’s Osmo products infringe these patents will depend on expert claim interpretation and product analysis.

Both companies hold extensive patent portfolios built up through drones and action cameras. This lawsuit represents a fierce clash in the new product category of vlog cameras. The validity of the patents and the question of infringement will be examined over months to years.

Asymmetry Created by FCC Regulations

The reason DJI was placed on the FCC’s Covered List stems from national security concerns. The perceived risk of DJI’s drones being used near U.S. government agencies and military facilities led to progressively stricter regulations starting in 2020. In 2025, the Covered List was expanded to include camera products as well.

As a result, DJI has been forced to use workarounds, such as creating alternate brands like Xtra each time it releases a new model in the U.S. Under these conditions, the patent lawsuit against Insta360 can be interpreted as an attempt to compensate for the frustration of being unable to expand its sales channels by going on the legal offensive.

However, it remains unclear how effective selling under the Xtra brand will be from a legal standpoint. Even if DJI formally avoids FCC regulations, further regulatory tightening or tariff measures could follow. For DJI, maintaining its influence in the U.S. market makes it highly necessary to check Insta360’s momentum.

Industry Impact and Future Developments

The vlog camera market has grown rapidly in recent years. The Osmo Pocket series was a pioneer in this space, and Insta360 has countered with the Luna Ultra. This lawsuit brings the competition for market dominance to the legal arena.

The outcome of the patent dispute will also affect product improvement directions and the timing of new model launches. If DJI secures an injunction, Insta360 may be forced to make significant design changes to the Luna Ultra. Conversely, if Insta360 wins on patent invalidity or non-infringement, it would provide a tailwind for the company’s product roadmap.

A settlement is also possible. Given the costs and time involved in litigation, both companies might opt for a licensing agreement or cross-licensing to resolve the matter. However, both sides have taken a hard line, and it is likely the case will be fought in court at least through the preliminary injunction stage.

Editorial Opinion

In the short term, this lawsuit could put a damper on Insta360’s sales of the Luna Ultra. If a preliminary injunction is granted early in the case where DJI seeks a permanent injunction, Insta360 runs the risk of being temporarily unable to sell the product in the U.S. market. On the other hand, DJI itself faces restrictions on selling new products due to FCC regulations, and regardless of the lawsuit’s outcome, recovering its presence in the U.S. market will not be easy.

From a long-term perspective, this case is shaping up as a race between pioneers over the standard technology in the vlog camera market. Gimbal stabilization technology is applicable to smartphone accessories and robotic cameras, so the value of these patents extends beyond a single product. The strength of each company’s patent portfolio is likely to determine their future market positions.

The key question for the editorial team is how much influence DJI can maintain in the U.S. market while under FCC regulations. How effective will the Xtra brand workaround be, and will the lawsuit succeed in checking Insta360? Furthermore, we must continue to monitor the impact of such patent lawsuits on vlog camera pricing and the pace of product innovation.

References

• Engadget: DJI and Insta360 are in a patent battle over vlogging cameras — Published June 12, 2026
• PetaPixel: DJI Sues Insta360 Over Osmo Pocket 3 Patent Infringement (cited in the referenced article) — Published June 11, 2026