Firmware Facts 101

[JSRomero]

The question still remains unequivocally unanswered...

Does updating the firmware on the camera indeed void the warranty or not? If it does, then will Canon refuse to service the camera even if they could charge you, the customer and owner, for the services rendered?

Certainly purchasing an HP, Compaq or Dell PC and wiping the factory load and installing one's one copy of WindowsXP Pro (as I have done) does not affect the hardware warranty. My Compaq is still covered under HP/CPQ warranty for hardware issues even though I wiped the machine clean and removed the service partition. Does this action void my warranty? No.

I guess the same question remains to be tested with respect to Canon and the Digital Rebel/300D/KISS. Does loading the firmware, while it being unsupported, void the warranty with respect to the hardware???

 

[Wayne Larmon]

The "fair use" wild card makes any absolute statment of "...is a
copyright violation" be limited to conjecture, until a judge has
actually ruled on the case. To the best of my knowldge, this
hasn't happened in this case.

You haven't committed any crime until you have been convicted.
From copyright violation to murder. I wouldn't live your life this
way, though. Eventually you will get convicted of something.

The point to this particular branch of this thread is that the firmware modification has not been determined to have been a copyright violation. Your stating that it is does not make it so.

Wayne Larmon

 

[RDKirk]

If it increases 300D sales, in the face of the competing and more
feature-rich D70 body, then no it won't harm Canon. In fact, it's
a blessing in disguise. I don't think the firmware modification is
enough to take away from 10D sales...

This opinion seems to override the decisions of Canon itself. Their
intentions seem quite clear. If they believed that including those
features in the 300D would boost 300D sales and not cut into 10D
sales, then they would have done this themselves, no?
-harry

Is that indeed what happens? Are any of these changes so significant that it sways the decision of any signficant number of people to purchase the Rebel rather than the 10D--or does it merely make a Rebel purchaser feel a bit better about the purchase?

We don't know what was in the mind of the Canon corporation. My own suspicion was that Canon corp-think has a particular image of a "snapshooter's camera" in mind and "silver body with no custom functions" merely fits that image.

What if a camera repair shop offered to do professional repainting of the Rebel body to black?

--
RDKirk

'I know you're smarter than I am. But I think you're making up some of those words.' Rocky Rooster from 'Chicken Run'

 

[RDKirk]

I'm only surprised that loading another operating system doesn't void your Compaq warranty.

The question still remains unequivocally unanswered...

Does updating the firmware on the camera indeed void the warranty
or not? If it does, then will Canon refuse to service the camera
even if they could charge you, the customer and owner, for the
services rendered?

Certainly purchasing an HP, Compaq or Dell PC and wiping the
factory load and installing one's one copy of WindowsXP Pro (as I
have done) does not affect the hardware warranty. My Compaq is
still covered under HP/CPQ warranty for hardware issues even though
I wiped the machine clean and removed the service partition. Does
this action void my warranty? No.

I guess the same question remains to be tested with respect to
Canon and the Digital Rebel/300D/KISS. Does loading the firmware,
while it being unsupported, void the warranty with respect to the
hardware???

--
RDKirk

'I know you're smarter than I am. But I think you're making up some of those words.' Rocky Rooster from 'Chicken Run'

 

[loupgarou]

Does updating the firmware on the camera indeed void the warranty or not? If it does, then will Canon refuse to service the camera even if they could charge you, the customer and owner, for the services rendered?
[ quote]

if you send in the camera with the hacked firmware, then probably yes. (eg; most cpu/harddisks etc come with a warranty void if tampered sticker, can we check if one exists for the 300D (in the manual documentation)).

in real life, after I dropped my camera and broke the back panel, I flashed my canon 1.1.1 firmware back and sent the camera in to replace the back panel, since this is also a damage situation not covered by warranty, they replaced it and charged me for it anyway.

 

[Mramiga]

Its yours take some pictures... install a hack .. install an emulator.. play game boy games on it.. but most of all take some pictures..

call canon USA warrenty and find out for yourself, instead of all the hear-say .. but i would have to agree with peblic probley is not legal

just use the camera you bought .. if canon is smart they will legitimize the hack

Im really getting sick of the board getting clogged up with the
trolls and whiny complaining nags regarding the firmware posted.

Here are some items to dispell the myths.

1) Modified firmware is in fact LEGAL. Re-Sale of copyrighted
software is NOT. If anyone begins charging for the firmware then
that is in fact a copyright infringement. Technically Wasia may be
found in violation of international copyrght laws by distributing
copyrighted software, however since Canon does NOT sell the
software nor is Wasia claiming it is his own work Canon would have
a very difficult time showing any punitive damages. BTW: He is in
Russia... good luck trying to extradite a russian for modifying
copyrighted firmware that is freely distributed via Canon.

2) Canon can NOT legally refuse warranty work on bodies
w/modified firmware. Legally for us folks in the USA look into the
Magnusson-Moss Act... Unless Canon can prove that as a result of
modification a particular part failed then and only then that part
is exempt from warranty. Not the whole camera etc...

This basically boils down to modifying your own property. If you
purchase a car and tint the windows, change the radio, replace the
tires etc ... your perfectly entitled to do so. You own your
product and its yours to paint black like a 10D or throw from the
highest building in town.

A lot of folks on here suffer from:

Inferiority complex/***** Envy: Afraid someone will have a
better product then they do and spent less $$ for it.

If you dont have the stuff needed to update your firmware becuase
you are paranoid, ethically conflicted, technologically challenged
etc ... then dont download it nor install it. STOP arguing and
whining like little pig-tailed school girls over it. The firmware
is in fact credible and valid and adds much that is desired by many
people here.

Few people say that the 300D is better then the 10D - It isnt in
build quality/ features nor some levels of hardware. The new
firmware adds functionality that many want and need.... If you own
a 10D and your miffed the 300D is a close runner up... take it up
w/Canon and stop crying about it here or beating your chests like
wild monkey's that your cameras are superior....

Why cant ppl just enjoy their cameras and shut up already?

--
Complete media development ranging from web presence to digital and
traditional photography. See http://cjkcybermedia.com and
http://gallery.cjkcybermedia.com

--
Dale Broughman
http://www.thebroughmans.com
Gallery: http://66.227.157.200:1980/photos/listpics.asp

 

[tim g203860]

actually, using a satellite card to access programming without paying for it falls under title 18, US Code, Section 1029, Use of an unauthorized access device. It is investigated primarily by the US Secret Service, and is akin to credit card fraud. using a hacked firmware is not the same. not even close. I can't speak for other countries, but I would bet that it is a similar situation.

--
Tim G

http://www.gangloffs.org

 

[photoace]

In any event, I suspect that Mr. W's efforts are helping sustain
300D sales in the face of some stiff competition with the D70, even
if they're possibly hurting EOS-1D sales.

Thoughts?

Yes, I agree. Mr. Wasia's software helps Canon sell more Digital
Rebels. I think Canon should wake-up and smell the roses, and
come-up with a Wasia type "upgrade" - and let everybody have it.
That would make them more popular with existing owners, future
buyers, and sell more products. I'm sure - unless they're total
knuckleheads - they'll soon come-up with their own firmware
"upgrade." It was dumb in the first place to disable so many
features to keep 10D owners happy. 10D has still enough features to
set it apart from the Rebel, plus Nikon D-70 is dropping their
prices.
But who knows if Canon executives are NOT knuckleheads? Time will
tell..

can u please explain to me y everyone gets so annoyed at canon for stripping the firmware down, u knew it was stripped when u bought it, u had the choice to buy a 10D, but u didn,t so y do ppl keep complaining?

matt

 

[JSRomero]

IMHO, regardless of whether the user installs the hacked firmware or not, the hardware should still be covered if there is a hardware related issue. Of course, if the problem is related to the hack then Canon should charge the customer for services rendered.

This entire scenario, which consumes this forum's, mine and yours, bandwidth has yet to be tested. What needs to happen is someone's camera to fail and have it sent to Canon with the hack on it and see what happends.

 

[tommy_douglas_NDP]

Also according to the Warranty agreement (and statute in many jurisdictions) Canon would have to demonstrate that the 3rd party product damaged the camera.

It would be like Dell refusing to replace a bad CPU on a Dell system because you installed a non-supported O/S ie. linux. Dell doesn't have to support a foreign O/S but they are still responsible for the workmanship of their product.

Realistically, Canon service will at most re-install the original firmware--this is consitent with anecdotal evidence on this message board. Its in their best inerest to keep you "on the road" using their product and buying their lenses. Canon doesn't want to encourage Rebel users to swtich to D70.

Consider also that many stores allow for returns. Canon doesn't want to punish innocent users who bought a returned but hacked Camera.

Steven

...........My only remaining question in regard to this hack is
whether Canon is legally obligated to service/repair a Rebel that
has it. I'm not neccessarily asking about the warranty because that
will have expired in nine months anyway. I know that some posts
have indicated that they are legally obligated to accept any Canon
camera that comes through the door but I'm not convinced. If they
returned it to me without fixing it for a failed shutter or for a
failure to turn on (what happened to my Toshiba PDR-M25) in a year
or two because they simply don't want to work on it because of the
hacked firmware, what recourse would I have then?

Under the intent of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in the US, yes
they would still have to provide warranty service. In real life I
suppose that they could find some technicality to give you a hard
time and you would have to sue them. It seems to me that it
certainly would not be in Canon's best interest to alienate their
customers, but companies have done dumber things. It remains to be
seen what will happen.

Bryan

 

[pbleic]

I was curious what Canon would say. So, I called. Not surprisingly, they said that, if the firmware was installed and anything broke they wouldn't honor the waranty. They didn't recommend using anything that was not released by Canon.

Now, who knows what they would really do.

Interestingly, the guy seemed to be reading from a script. He suggested that it was possible for them to detect whether you had EVER installed the firmware. I doubt they could do this - I am sure that if there is any history at all, all it records is the install date and firmware version. I can't believe they would record the size of the package (which could identify a hack) installed. Or, that they would bother to look.

In any case, they certainly know about it and have an "official policy."

--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------

Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004 All rights reserved.

 

[PaulyOly]

I cut the frame in several places, replaced the springs with air
springs, moved the shocks by rewelding mounts. Cut out the front
wheel wells so it could roll this low. Everyone told me this would
void my warranty, but Ford fixed my AC when it went out just the
same. They even played with the air suspension. You should see
what i did to the inside. All this i did myself, so i say hack it
up, cut it up and shut it up!

So a little software hack is childs play to me.

--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

--
[email protected]

they have to show that the modifications i made caused the A/C problem. Of course my no inner fenders may very well have caused it from a rock flying up, but that's not really my point. My point is Canon would most likely fix a hacked firmware camera just to avoid bad publicity. No matter wether or not the hack is legal or ethical it just doesn't look good when the big bad corporation picks on the poor insignificant consumer.

Personally i think Canon should fix the Ai focus problem with the rebel that i and many others have when recomposing, but they don't see it as a problem. I wish everyone that sees this as a problem would send them a written letter, then canon may see the problem and i wouldn't need the firmware hack.
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 

[PaulyOly]

Anyone who contacted Canon to ask their opinion is an idiot. ~ m²

That's the smartest thing you've ever posted Mark, well maybe. I didn't need to send Canon an email to know their response.

Im really getting sick of the board getting clogged up with the
trolls and whiny complaining nags regarding the firmware posted.

Here are some items to dispell the myths.

1) Modified firmware is in fact LEGAL. Re-Sale of copyrighted
software is NOT. If anyone begins charging for the firmware then
that is in fact a copyright infringement. Technically Wasia may be
found in violation of international copyrght laws by distributing
copyrighted software, however since Canon does NOT sell the
software nor is Wasia claiming it is his own work Canon would have
a very difficult time showing any punitive damages. BTW: He is in
Russia... good luck trying to extradite a russian for modifying
copyrighted firmware that is freely distributed via Canon.

2) Canon can NOT legally refuse warranty work on bodies
w/modified firmware. Legally for us folks in the USA look into the
Magnusson-Moss Act... Unless Canon can prove that as a result of
modification a particular part failed then and only then that part
is exempt from warranty. Not the whole camera etc...

This basically boils down to modifying your own property. If you
purchase a car and tint the windows, change the radio, replace the
tires etc ... your perfectly entitled to do so. You own your
product and its yours to paint black like a 10D or throw from the
highest building in town.

A lot of folks on here suffer from:

Inferiority complex/***** Envy: Afraid someone will have a
better product then they do and spent less $$ for it.

If you dont have the stuff needed to update your firmware becuase
you are paranoid, ethically conflicted, technologically challenged
etc ... then dont download it nor install it. STOP arguing and
whining like little pig-tailed school girls over it. The firmware
is in fact credible and valid and adds much that is desired by many
people here.

Few people say that the 300D is better then the 10D - It isnt in
build quality/ features nor some levels of hardware. The new
firmware adds functionality that many want and need.... If you own
a 10D and your miffed the 300D is a close runner up... take it up
w/Canon and stop crying about it here or beating your chests like
wild monkey's that your cameras are superior....

Why cant ppl just enjoy their cameras and shut up already?

--
Complete media development ranging from web presence to digital and
traditional photography. See http://cjkcybermedia.com and
http://gallery.cjkcybermedia.com

--
I'm sorry, we were unable to fix your headshot...
http://rhodeymark.instantlogic.com/PhotoGallery.ilx

--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 

[PaulyOly]

I was curious what Canon would say. So, I called. Not
surprisingly, they said that, if the firmware was installed and
anything broke they wouldn't honor the waranty. They didn't
recommend using anything that was not released by Canon.

Now, who knows what they would really do.

Interestingly, the guy seemed to be reading from a script.

Of course they read from a script, so does every customer service representative. They probably type in hacked firmware on their computer and it pops up with what to say. Canon would never officially state that you could use some other software in their product. This is the only answer canon could give you or else they would be liable. Assume that Canon said they would honor the warranty if you install some hacked firmware and then all of the sudden every camera with the hack blew up. They would be screwed. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if canon downloaded these hacks and tested them out themselves. I know i would. As you stated i highly doubt they could tell if you installed some hacked firmware, it's not like they set down when designing the camera and said lets make it keep a record of any firmware installed.

He

suggested that it was possible for them to detect whether you had
EVER installed the firmware. I doubt they could do this - I am
sure that if there is any history at all, all it records is the
install date and firmware version. I can't believe they would
record the size of the package (which could identify a hack)
installed. Or, that they would bother to look.

In any case, they certainly know about it and have an "official
policy."

--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------
Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004
All rights reserved.

--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 

[sb11x]

it is not facts so don't say something that you don't know anything about, and this was discused so many times. why bring it up again?
sergei

Im really getting sick of the board getting clogged up with the
trolls and whiny complaining nags regarding the firmware posted.

Here are some items to dispell the myths.

1) Modified firmware is in fact LEGAL. Re-Sale of copyrighted
software is NOT. If anyone begins charging for the firmware then
that is in fact a copyright infringement. Technically Wasia may be
found in violation of international copyrght laws by distributing
copyrighted software, however since Canon does NOT sell the
software nor is Wasia claiming it is his own work Canon would have
a very difficult time showing any punitive damages. BTW: He is in
Russia... good luck trying to extradite a russian for modifying
copyrighted firmware that is freely distributed via Canon.

2) Canon can NOT legally refuse warranty work on bodies
w/modified firmware. Legally for us folks in the USA look into the
Magnusson-Moss Act... Unless Canon can prove that as a result of
modification a particular part failed then and only then that part
is exempt from warranty. Not the whole camera etc...

This basically boils down to modifying your own property. If you
purchase a car and tint the windows, change the radio, replace the
tires etc ... your perfectly entitled to do so. You own your
product and its yours to paint black like a 10D or throw from the
highest building in town.

A lot of folks on here suffer from:

Inferiority complex/***** Envy: Afraid someone will have a
better product then they do and spent less $$ for it.

If you dont have the stuff needed to update your firmware becuase
you are paranoid, ethically conflicted, technologically challenged
etc ... then dont download it nor install it. STOP arguing and
whining like little pig-tailed school girls over it. The firmware
is in fact credible and valid and adds much that is desired by many
people here.

Few people say that the 300D is better then the 10D - It isnt in
build quality/ features nor some levels of hardware. The new
firmware adds functionality that many want and need.... If you own
a 10D and your miffed the 300D is a close runner up... take it up
w/Canon and stop crying about it here or beating your chests like
wild monkey's that your cameras are superior....

Why cant ppl just enjoy their cameras and shut up already?

--
Complete media development ranging from web presence to digital and
traditional photography. See http://cjkcybermedia.com and
http://gallery.cjkcybermedia.com

--
http://members.shaw.ca/sergeibelski/

 

[Graeme Cogger]

can u please explain to me y everyone gets so annoyed at canon for
stripping the firmware down, u knew it was stripped when u bought
it, u had the choice to buy a 10D, but u didn,t so y do ppl keep
complaining?

For me the issue is not that the firmware was crippled since, as you say, I knew that when I bought the camera. I get annoyed (or perhaps disappointed) at Canon because some of the crippled features are necessary due to inadequacies of the camera.

I need FEC since I get consistent under-exposure with flash otherwise. I need one-shot focus to allow me to focus where I want to by focus-recompose. I'd also say that I need more exposure control since the metering is very poor if you use a single focus point (except on the manual setting).
None of these problems were apparent until I'd bought the camera.

 

[Graeme Cogger]

Distributing the code that is copied and modified by only one bit,
violates intellectual property rights and many laws. Period.

That it is easy, cheap, and (so far) without retribution from Canon
is another issue altogether.

if someday somebody copies your photos and distributes them with or
without mods, don't whine.

I'd say that the analogy would be closer if someone distributed a modified copy of your photos only to those who had already bought the photo from yourself.
Some people might see that as a problem, and others might not.

 

[roger55]

I absolutely agree!

Although it has nothing to do with the legality of the issue, it sure takes away any feeling of guilt for using the hack.

I hope Canon realizes that the camera needs some of the features of the hack firmware for the camera to work as advertised and release an official firmware update.

If you advertise that a camera has an onboard flash, it ought to work adequately and it definitely doesn't without FEC! Canon is considered the best for digtal cameras and I don't expect mistakes from them like this.

can u please explain to me y everyone gets so annoyed at canon for
stripping the firmware down, u knew it was stripped when u bought
it, u had the choice to buy a 10D, but u didn,t so y do ppl keep
complaining?

For me the issue is not that the firmware was crippled since, as
you say, I knew that when I bought the camera. I get annoyed (or
perhaps disappointed) at Canon because some of the crippled
features are necessary due to inadequacies of the camera.
I need FEC since I get consistent under-exposure with flash
otherwise. I need one-shot focus to allow me to focus where I want
to by focus-recompose. I'd also say that I need more exposure
control since the metering is very poor if you use a single focus
point (except on the manual setting).
None of these problems were apparent until I'd bought the camera.

 

[photoguynorth]

The analogy that comes to my mind is if you sold prints with a banner on them (for example proofs) and someone modified them (removed the banner) and gave it away so your customers did not have to buy the more expensive non-bannered prints.

Distributing the code that is copied and modified by only one bit,
violates intellectual property rights and many laws. Period.

That it is easy, cheap, and (so far) without retribution from Canon
is another issue altogether.

if someday somebody copies your photos and distributes them with or
without mods, don't whine.

I'd say that the analogy would be closer if someone distributed a
modified copy of your photos only to those who had already bought
the photo from yourself.
Some people might see that as a problem, and others might not.

 

[hqm]

I bought the camera and firmware, and I can modify it all I want. If someone has modified it and can show me how, I don't see anything unethical in that.

If I had not bought the firmware, that would be different. I am not paying the guy for the modifications, he is giving them to me.

How about this scenario, you buy Harry Potter and read it to your friends. Unethical? Apparently yes in your view. How about you and your friends all buy a copy of Harry Potter, and then exchange new stories based on it. Not for money, for fun. Illegal I hope not. How about discussing how to improve the gas mileage on your car? Wil lthe oil companies come and get me? What kind of a world do you want to live in?

I think the view that there is something unethical about this firmware is way over the line between a civil society and a fascist corporate state.