Author Topic: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?  (Read 15160 times)

sandisk

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« on: January 16, 2013, 07:47:34 PM »
What is the legality of the Magic Lantern firmware from Canon's point of view?

Am I breaking the law by installing ML on my Canon 5DC, or is it the software devs who might get in trouble.

With the recent talk of firmware hacking the Canon 1Dx into a 1Dc, Canon's lawyers are on red alert on the rumours that Magic Lantern are working on this.

Who is breaking intellectual property law? The creator or the user?

I really don't know, can anyone say?
Sold my Canon 5Dc. Now enjoying my 5D2 with liveview and Magic Lantern. INCREDIBLE !

scrax

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1543
  • Code monkey
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2013, 07:50:42 PM »
read the answer in the first topic where you asked this and don't double post please.

Porting 1Dc firmware to 1DX is totally another different thing than ML code.
MLTeam never had even the idea to start trying to work on the 1D series so Canon got scared for nothing if their concern is ML, tell them that they can give some holidays to their lawyers  ;)
I'm using ML2.3 for photography with:
EOS 600DML | EOS 400Dplus | EOS 5D MLbeta5- EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro  - EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM - EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM - 580EXII - OsX, PS, LR, RawTherapee, LightZone -no video experience-

RenatoPhoto

  • Moderators
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • 5DM3 / 7D
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2013, 08:06:04 PM »
But to me any Canon issues with hacking should be turned into profit rather that debate.   Lets look at iPhone or any of the successful smart phones.  These platforms allow the hacking and sell you the tools so that you can do a better job.  Who can write a good program for a photographic application?  I think a photographer that uses that app and knows programming will be much more capable of producing a piece of software that is useful.

I think that Magic Lantern answers the need that Canon has failed to address and should be rewarded rather than punished.  I think Canon knows this, and agrees with this statement, and that is the reason why they still allow us to install Magic Lantern in our cams.  It would be really SMART if Canon released the code so that the users can better make use of their cameras.  If Nikon is smarter then maybe they will do it first... 

Renato
http://www.pululahuahostal.com  |  EF 300 f/4, EF 100-400 L, EF 180 L, EF-S 10-22, Samyang 14mm, Sigma 28mm EX DG, Sigma 8mm 1:3.5 EX DG, EF 50mm 1:1.8 II, EF 1.4X II, Kenko C-AF 2X

scrax

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1543
  • Code monkey
Re: Magic Lantern - the best ever
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2013, 08:16:46 PM »
Releasing the code by Canon will need a sort of iOS that will grant stability (and you will have a locked OS on the camera with crappstore like iphone/osx has :D )
Also bad coding will mean more cost on Canon's service centers.
ML is good because our main concern is stability, so Canon can sleep well without fear of mass service returns.
Actually we saw that users came here to find a solution even for hardware problems before sending camera to service.  :)
I'm using ML2.3 for photography with:
EOS 600DML | EOS 400Dplus | EOS 5D MLbeta5- EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro  - EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM - EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM - 580EXII - OsX, PS, LR, RawTherapee, LightZone -no video experience-

RenatoPhoto

  • Moderators
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • 5DM3 / 7D
Re: Magic Lantern - the best ever
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2013, 08:40:19 PM »
Well, if Canon released the code then this would allow Magic Lantern to become a product that can be sold and you guys could make some money doing  what you like to do.   I would think that ML would then become a successful NASDAQ traded stock.
http://www.pululahuahostal.com  |  EF 300 f/4, EF 100-400 L, EF 180 L, EF-S 10-22, Samyang 14mm, Sigma 28mm EX DG, Sigma 8mm 1:3.5 EX DG, EF 50mm 1:1.8 II, EF 1.4X II, Kenko C-AF 2X

scrax

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1543
  • Code monkey
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2013, 09:26:07 PM »
Selling ML is not illegal. Releasing it as an open source software was a (great IMHO) choice.
I think that most devs are here for that reason, working together to learn embedded devices hacking while having fun(without the problems/limits a dev usually has when working on a commercial products)
Any custom software can be sold right now (you don't need windows source code to sell an app that runs on it) but for ML it will slow down development and will limit user contributions/feedback that are needed for having a stable product.
I'm using ML2.3 for photography with:
EOS 600DML | EOS 400Dplus | EOS 5D MLbeta5- EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro  - EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM - EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM - 580EXII - OsX, PS, LR, RawTherapee, LightZone -no video experience-

RenatoPhoto

  • Moderators
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • 5DM3 / 7D
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2013, 10:50:36 PM »
I am a new user of ML and I am totally blown away by what this software can do.  So I think that once again, the model of open source works, just like in Linux.   I am learning a bit of C and hope that someday I can contribute...

I think that Canon is benefiting from what you guys do and I don't see any reciprocity in this (non-existent) relation.  So what I am insinuating is that it would make your development better and easier if Canon released the code so that your products are even better.

Case in point:  I am dying to have 3X video digital crop in my 7D and 5D.  I think that this is the kind of product that will allow me to make better videos without having to carry heavy lenses; incidentally I could not carry one of those 600mm lenses all day due to my age and size.  So why do ML do not provide this feature?  Because...

1. The development time to reverse engineer this would be huge.  Alex said 0.001% possibility to develop this tool.
2. The FEAR that you (DEVS) may piss Cannon off and that Canon might lock you out on future cameras.  Porting the feature of one camera to another is viewed as a risky process.

So now you have to walk on eggs without getting the real recognition for your work, blocking your development, and blocking the freedom and ingenuity that has gotten you where ML is today.  A great product.

I certainly don't think this is fair for MLs!  Maybe Canon should put forth some type of an agreement to make your hard work count or maybe Nikon should do it.  I just hate to see Canon take advantage of this unfair (non-existent) relation.
http://www.pululahuahostal.com  |  EF 300 f/4, EF 100-400 L, EF 180 L, EF-S 10-22, Samyang 14mm, Sigma 28mm EX DG, Sigma 8mm 1:3.5 EX DG, EF 50mm 1:1.8 II, EF 1.4X II, Kenko C-AF 2X

a1ex

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12457
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #7 on: January 17, 2013, 12:30:31 AM »
Here's a summary of the legal issues that we should consider: http://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq

Now, regarding other firmware hacks, some manufacturers like them (e.g. Microsoft Surface and Kinect; Asus supports dd-wrt), some are afraid of mass bricking (e.g. Panasonic), some just refuse warranty (Rockbox vs Iriver and Archos), some attempt to block the hacks in recent firmware update (e.g. Samsung vs SamyGO) and the bad ones resort to legal threats (Sony: PS3, Aibo; Texas Instruments: TI-83 calculators).

So far, Canon has not made any statements about Magic Lantern, nor CHDK, to our knowledge.

There is some anectodal evidence that using it might not even void the warranty (just unofficial statements from some service guys). In Europe you might not lose the warranty at all according to this post (unless you brick the camera).

There is also a rumour that 1DX might have identical hardware as 1DC, and another rumour that Canon will consider legal action to anyone who will modify the features of the 1DX. Last week, this got a lot of coverage on blogs/forums (lwn.net, nofilmschool, eoshd, dvxuser, potn, doodleme and others).

Now, since we never considered porting ML on the 1DX (because of high price, small user base and high costs in the case of bricking), this rumour doesn't mean much for us. It's just another reason to stay away from the pro market, and limit ourselves to the low and midrange dslrs.

Of course, we are careful to stay within the legal limits, but that's what we did since ML started. Both USA and EU laws allow us to reverse engineer without requiring permission from Canon, but there are some restrictions (we can RE for achieving interoperability between the camera and our own software, not for stealing features from a more expensive camera).

And yes, this means walking on eggs.

For the original question: I don't think anyone is breaking any laws for installing ML on his camera. It's yours - you bought it, you can void your warranty and do whatever you want with it.

1%

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5936
  • 600D/6D/50D/EOSM/7D
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #8 on: January 17, 2013, 12:56:51 AM »
Nothing here is illegal. Its more paranoia than anything. The worst thing that could happen would be a civil tort.

An sdk would be nice but I don't think canon is up to it. They can't even code up a decent interface. You think I put a lot of toggles, canon has a ton of tabs on 6D, many only have a few features on them and the same icon. WTF.

Wanna talk about legally questionable? hv20 mpeg codec isn't licensed for commercial use... Is h264 on canon slr cameras? I have my doubts, would have to look in manuals and EULA.

Quote
So why do ML do not provide this feature?

Because i can't figure out how to turn it on without crashing. Some parts might be gone from FW. it might need extra code and definitely needs a deeper understanding of how this mode functions. Pre-zoom cameras like 5d/7d might need more work too. Not so easy.

This mode isn't really for cheating with lenses. Its more to get rid of moire and the awful scaling/interpolation. The extra reach is either a benefit or a curse depending on what you're filming.

Funny that its the reverse... low end cameras have features that high end ones don't.  600D crop video is the same or better than 6d video. 6D is more reliable and can record audio with higher rates but no monitoring yet so it kinda falls apart.

RenatoPhoto

  • Moderators
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
  • 5DM3 / 7D
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2013, 01:49:29 AM »
You guys are awesome, your differences duplicate your strength.  Each one provides what the other lacks, that is the power of independent thinking and open source code!
http://www.pululahuahostal.com  |  EF 300 f/4, EF 100-400 L, EF 180 L, EF-S 10-22, Samyang 14mm, Sigma 28mm EX DG, Sigma 8mm 1:3.5 EX DG, EF 50mm 1:1.8 II, EF 1.4X II, Kenko C-AF 2X

mr.vijayaraghavan

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2013, 08:27:56 AM »
You guys are awesome, your differences duplicate your strength.  Each one provides what the other lacks, that is the power of independent thinking and open source code!

Hi!  I am not a tech. guy.  But, considering if Canons don't appreciate MLs:  Then, to counter MLs, will they not prefer a tech. option to legal one?  What if Canons devise a firmware update with some features (which may include a worm  to disable a camera that has ML uploaded in it)? May sound bizarre; but it isn't new in this competitive business world!  Have MLs considered this and taken any measures to block such attempts?

Anyway, I subscribe to your view that Canons should dialogue with MLs to move forward with renewed spirit for a collective objective to help consumers with dynamic features.  Hats off to MLs and their RE (which has, in a way, helped Canon's marketing).  I was oscillating between 60d and d7000; and ML made it easy for me to choose 60d!  ML has definitely given wings to the creative urge of photographers, at no cost.

Datadogie

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
  • I have a picture memory exept I forgot the sd card
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2013, 01:26:16 PM »
That's a good point. How many people have bought Canon over other brands because of Magic Lantern. I think Canon should be donating here.
T3i and Kiss X4 (550d (T2i)) Tamron 18-200mm, Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 (need firmware upgrade) Olympus 50mm f1.8  Olympus 28mm f2.8 and Olympus 24mm f2.8
Fancier 370 tripod and LCD hinged loupe. DIY Slider and crane.

a1ex

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12457
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2013, 04:57:20 PM »
What if Canons devise a firmware update with some features (which may include a worm  to disable a camera that has ML uploaded in it)? May sound bizarre; but it isn't new in this competitive business world!  Have MLs considered this and taken any measures to block such attempts?

Canon changed the encryption for 7D and later cameras (that was back in 2009). They did not do anything else to block ML code.

deleted.account.01

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2013, 03:43:39 AM »
in my opinion Canon should add HUGE Amounts of  donations for ML makers ,,, its my first digital camera ..al llife i shot form analog...


i was pick two to buy ..Nikon 3200 or Canon T3i ... after few checks  i found Magic Lantern and after this my choice was  perfec and clear..i pick Canon only cus Magic Lantern gives alot...

mr.vijayaraghavan

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #14 on: January 20, 2013, 07:31:24 PM »
Canon changed the encryption for 7D and later cameras (that was back in 2009). They did not do anything else to block ML code.

Nice they didn't.  What if they do in future?  Consider this; 60d doesn't have AF microadjust.  A firmware update for AF microadjust is overwhelmingly welcomed by all 60d users.  If the update includes a worm to disable ML cameras... Gone!  Same thing is possible to any canon camera.  Well...I may be blabbering here for arguements' sake; but it is not an impossible probability (if they feel threatened: Though there is no reason for such apprehensions).

g3gg0

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3157
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2013, 07:45:30 PM »
Nice they didn't.  What if they do in future?  Consider this; 60d doesn't have AF microadjust.  A firmware update for AF microadjust is overwhelmingly welcomed by all 60d users.  If the update includes a worm to disable ML cameras... Gone!  Same thing is possible to any canon camera.  Well...I may be blabbering here for arguements' sake; but it is not an impossible probability (if they feel threatened: Though there is no reason for such apprehensions).

in my opinion even talking about that is paranoic.
if it happens, then its time to think about. at the moment any minute spent for thinking about that, is lost time ;)
Help us with datasheets - Help us with register dumps
magic lantern: 1Magic9991E1eWbGvrsx186GovYCXFbppY, server expenses: paypal@g3gg0.de
ONLY donate for things we have done, not for things you expect!

mr.vijayaraghavan

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: Magic Lantern - Is it legal?
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2013, 02:11:48 PM »
in my opinion even talking about that is paranoic.
if it happens, then its time to think about. at the moment any minute spent for thinking about that, is lost time ;)

I agree.  Paranoia or not; legal issues, of late, are largely revolving around such technical undercuts IMHO 


joemumper

  • Just arrived
  • *
  • Posts: 1
5D Mark III Raw Question
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2013, 05:07:55 AM »
Hi I was just wondering, as I noticed they have a stable release for the Mark II among other cameras.  But just wondering if anyone has a clue as too when a stable release for the 5D Mark III, is going too be announced?

Walter Schulz

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7581