I mean, you don't see Ford putting out bounties on drunk hit'n'run drivers, and that's something that's cost thousands of lives.
How is this type of McCarthy PR acceptable?
DJI customers, what are your thoughts on this?
Ethically yes
From a business standpoint yes:
If they are concerned about 300 families from passengers from a stricken airliner coming after them for billions, then yes, yes it is.
If they are concerned about the FAA restricting drone use altogether, then yes. (they've already required drones be registered. If they're aircraft that cant be operated safely then FAA can ground them all, and much of the world follows our FAA's rulings)
A civilian UAS & manned aircraft collision resulting in loss of life is statistically inevitable. How DJI fares in court by showing it exhausted all means to prevent their products from doing harm when the unfortunate does occur, is something they can be proactive with.
Ford doesn't need to put out bounties because there's adequate regulation to punish drunk drivers. However, in the early days of motoring there was definitely private investment into shaping the discussion around cars - jaywalking was invented by automakers and heavily promoted to shift the role of roads from being primarily for pedestrians to primarily for cars: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/04/invention-jay...
They also happen to be necessary to the operation of our society. Drones are little more then toys. If all drones were grounded tomorrow, life would go on. If all cars stopped tomorrow, half the country would starve to death by June.