For the first time in its two-decade history, the drone juggernaut DJI has launched a domestic patent ownership lawsuit, targeting the imaging hardware specialist Insta360. The litigation, filed in the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court, involves six specific patent disputes. What began as a legal filing quickly evolved into a public relations crisis for Insta360, as its leadership's attempt to frame the conflict through a narrative of 'the giant vs. the underdog' failed to resonate with an increasingly sophisticated audience.
At the heart of the legal battle is a critical provision of China’s Patent Law. Article 13 stipulates that inventions made by employees within one year of leaving their former employer are considered 'service inventions' belonging to the original company if the work relates to their previous duties. DJI alleges that former employees joined Insta360 and filed patents for related technologies shortly after their departure, directly infringing on DJI's intellectual property rights and research investments.
Insta360’s CEO, Liu Jingkang, responded with an emotional long-form post, often referred to in Chinese tech circles as a 'small essay,' emphasizing his company’s role as an innovator and a victim of market pressure. However, this strategy backfired. Critics pointed out that Insta360 is no longer a small startup, with its valuation previously peaking near 120 billion yuan. The attempt to utilize 'heroic individualism' to answer specific legal allegations regarding the 12-month rule was seen as an avoidance of the core technical facts.
The controversy is deepened by discrepancies in patent filings. DJI noted that Insta360 requested that inventor names remain confidential in domestic Chinese filings, yet these same names were fully disclosed in international Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications. While hiding names domestically is legally permitted to prevent headhunting, the inconsistency allowed DJI to suggest that Insta360 was intentionally obscuring the identities of former DJI engineers involved in the disputed technologies.
Beyond the courtroom, the conflict is fueled by a shifting market landscape where DJI has aggressively moved into Insta360's home turf. Since the launch of the Osmo 360, DJI’s share of the 360-camera market has surged from zero to over 43%, effectively breaking Insta360's near-monopoly. By early 2026, data suggests DJI has surpassed Insta360 in total online sales volume, forcing the latter to pivot into the drone market to survive, which in turn triggered further defensive maneuvers from DJI.
This legal clash represents a maturing phase for Chinese technology. The era of winning market battles through marketing stunts and public sympathy is being replaced by a more rigorous reliance on patent moats and legal precedents. As Chinese firms begin to hold significant global IP portfolios, the protection of trade secrets and technical ownership is no longer just a strategy, but a fundamental boundary for survival in the high-stakes hardware industry.