Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?

Suppose I have my car's ECU remapped (chipped) so I get more power out
of the engine. Would that break any manufacturer's rights?

With software user has a licence to use it and does not own it. With a
camera the user owns it and is free to modify it.

If Canon had a sound case about other people reverse engineering its
products it would have stopped Sigma/Tamron/Tokina long ago.


DanP

 

You both are missing an even more subtle conundrum. Under IP law if
Canon does not defend its IP rights, it looses them. If Canon made a
business decision to let the undefended rights quietly go into the
public domain, I am not privy to that information.

 

Canon has defended their IP rights for their products. They have also
demonstrated respect for others IP rights. They are not obliged
to fend off everyone to retain those rights. The original CHDK hack
was done in Russia. Canon has a well supported SDK for developers
and are clear about what information is in the public domain.

w..

 

Some of our customers are third party ECU developers who independently
produce alternative code sets. Most notably the 500 - 1500 mile engines
used in competitive racing. NASCAR for example in 2012. The same code
sets can be used in street cars. Most of these trade engine life and
fuel economy for performance.

All of the third party code sets that I know about have appropriate code
licensing. It is primarily a myth about hacked ECU code magically providing
dramatic performance improvements. Getting rid of RPM limiters in hacked
code generally would be an invitation for broken valve springs and bearing
failures in street cars. It is a self correcting problem

Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited

 

As well they should.
I was talking about only the IP rights that may have been violated using
CHDK.
Since I am not a Canon user I do not follow the detail.

 

It seems to me that using hacked code could void warrantys

 

CHDK is run from a prepared SD card. After replacing the card with a
blank one there is no trace CHDK was run on that camera.
So unless the user hands in the camera with CHDK on it or admits using
it Canon has to service it.

DanP

 

But the user can use non licensed codes, right? Losing the warranty of
course.
No car manufacturer would object to it, only advise against it.

DanP

 

In a car?

 

It is like any third party add on. Third parties develop original work or
a combination of licensed and original IP Owners can use the software
it at their own risk.

CHDK is mostly Canon's unlicensed IP and that is where the issues
start to come into it. There is original IP in CHDK that could have
been turned into an interesting product in my opinion. There is other
third party code written to support Canon camera's licensed through
Canon's SDK.

w..

 

You mean someone I sold my house, including the laptop and Beatles
Butcher LP, to, entering said house and putting both in a StarTrek
replicator to create a copy for themselves?

And that is forbidden because I locked the door before selling
the house?

And that is amoral because they might also in the business of
selling houses and now might place the LP and the laptop in
their houses, *instead* of Mona Lisa copies and fridges and big
TV screens?

And that is amoral because they might offer cool programs for said
laptop for anyone to copy for free, which work on most Canon-built
houses with Beatles Butcher LP and laptop?

Neither is illegal, btw.

You don't understand CHDK at all, do you?

If they don't complain about the noise in the high ISO settings
on board, I doubt they'll complain about the noise in the higher
ISO settings.

They get to sell more cameras.
Of course that is no win for them, since they aren't making money
from that.

Doug is free to find a camera that has the features he needs
inbuild. Finding that camera will mean spending time, possibly
a lot of time, probably to find no such beast exists. Then the
commercial non-offering will never ever be redeemed, unlike his
CHDK search, which has yielded information to be used.

-Wolfgang

 

Sorry, what exactly was *copied* by CHDK? You know, it's COPYright, not
exclude-others-from-building-sandcastles-with-the-sand-and-bucket-they-bought-from-me-right.

And yes, it's ethical to use the things one has bought even if
the seller didn't think one would. And it's ethical to share
with others.

-Wolfgang

 

CHDK is not Canon's IP. CHDK is making use of Canon's IP which is not
reproduced or altered in any way.


DanP

 

OK, you asked for it: Provide proof.
Now.

-Wolfgang

 

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;

Is THAT all the excuses you can contrive!?
Will you agree every one is arguable?

....and....????


The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.

 

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;

Exactly. But there's more concise ways of putting that.
Simply put, not all property rights are equal.
Theft is violation of property rights.
So stealing one thing is often less of an ethical violation
than another. And the law (punishment) supports this.

aproximate order:
Personal property & tools.
Business property.
bank accounts.
land ownership
intellectual rights

That order is true in most cultures, however
they vary widly, for example Native Americans
and OT Jews didn't believe in personal land ownership.
American culture is the most possesive in the
world, you can't download the novel 1984 here,
but it's OK in most of the world...etc...

So one's high horse regarding "theft" of "intellectual
property rights," is a result of our cultural
indoctrinization, which granted, is pushed by the
most cutting edge mind-bending that Madison Avenue
can devise. (IOW; that humans can devise.)
(That's all just simple economics.)

By definition, property rights are the right to deny
the benefits of that property to others,
which has potential to cost society,
for example, if clean water was 10 cents/gallon.

Oh please! Now's not the time to ruin a perfectly
good soundsgoodism! Why, with that hint of moral
indignation, why, we had a bit of feelsgoodism going too!
Yer no fun!

No, not in the "economic theory" sense of choice.
As you know, that assumes perfect knowledge.

I ended up buying the sx120 10X rather than the competing
Lumix 12X and new sx130 12X w HDvideo based on presuming
that CHDK was not in a shambles, based on a raves
here and my positive experience with reputable freeware
elsewhere. As it turned out, since the new upgraded
sx130 got instant CHDK, I should have got that. The
better photo qual Lumix? ...arguable. My costs were more
than the utterly unforeseen and excessive "hobby time."

No biggy, this time got it wrong and lost.

Some see mowing the lawn as leisure activity too.
I see it and some other nessesities as unpleasantries
cutting into my leisure time. Others are in a position to
hire a gardner. Them's just the facts.

Oh, BTW I tried to logon to setepontos.com today, and
it refused to send me my registration email. Retry, and
it looped to: ERROR! Email sent.
Nope, not sent. Yup, error.
I had intended to ask a question and leave some pointers
for newbies.
....but what is needed is deletion, plenty of deletion.
I'm not qualified for that. Not even close.




The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.

 

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;

While theoretically CHDK could harm a camera,
for example taking a picture every 2 seconds for
months at a time, that threat is not practical.

All CHDK does is pull the levers that Canon
has kindly left accesable. It it bothered them,
they would no longer be accessable after all
these different processors.

It sells cameras, go to Wikipedia, CHDK is
a powershot biggy in the *lead section!*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_PowerShot

It's why I bought Canon rather than Lumix.
CHDK is there because Canon wants it there.
That's just simple economics.





The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.

 

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;

Yup. But Fox-Limbaugh&Co teach that evidence must be
weighed according to it's soundsgood factor and that
armchair postulating is as good (better, actually) as
science. *Everthing* is only a matter of (political)
opinion, and Science is in on the Vast Evil Plot. .

smile



The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.

 

Agree 100%.

 

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;

Yup. It's the microsoft definition of KISS:
Keep It comicbook Simple for Stupid. That's us.
I believe it was the Elph line that had
IR remote removed. Another Canon removed twisty
LCDs for awhile.

While the market has proven that MS KISS works,
CHDK fills a void, a nich market. But in my opinion,
that market can be widely expanded at little cost,
I think it must be shrinking now due to sloppy,
undisciplined, aimlessly wandering haphazard documentation.

And manufcturers seemingly HATE physical buttons,
while recognizing that the endless nested cascading
menus are already unweildy and already border on the absurd.
(But those are free to manufacture and maintain.)

But techies like us can deal with it, and
Canon recognizes the hacker/tweakers luvs them.

Manf' HATE buttons, yup?

I notice one can now buy universal remotes at the dollar
store.
If Bossman saw the longterm and understood radio, one could
program it via your cellphone's QWERTY keypad. Soon all
universal remotes, like cellphones, will have full keypads;
onscreen or otherwise.

The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.