Turn your 300D into a 10D...

Well, not quite, but close!

http://forums.eyo.com.au/arc/t-44867.html

Apparently enables the custom features menu on the 300D.

Scott.

 

Turn you 300D into a useless piece of junk too, if you try to go back to the
original OS and make a warranty claim!
HF

 

Well, if it's a mechanical problem there's nothing that the firmware could
have done to it. If it's a software problem, then for sure, you won't get
warranty. They shouldn't be charging you very much on a software reload
though, takes all of 4 minutes to do. If they tried pulling shit like that
on you when it was a mechanical problem you'd have a good case for Dept of
Fair Trading/Consumer affairs etc.

Cam

 

Quite clearly you have never read the Australian Trade Practices Act.
Warranty does not cover stupidity.
HF

 

On what part of the Act are you proposing that a warranty may be made void
for /any/ fault where there is evidence of use of third party accessories or
software, assuming of course that there is no proof that those
accessories/software caused said fault.

Curious.

 

If the camera is dead and it's got hacked firmware... Canon's warranty
exclusions are valid.
HF

 

-------------------
The implication that you imply here ken is somewhat odd. It is akin to
modifying the computer in a car, blowing the engine because your hack let
it over rev and then expecting a new engine under warranty. It just
doesn't happen.

If you hack your firmware and kill your camera, there is
no way you can invoke a law to force the maker into honoring a warranty
claim. I will concede though that Canon are among the most liberal of
Australian Camera importers when it comes to warranty but even they would
have a problem with the above scenario.

Douglas

 

Ah.. found that out the hard way eh?

 

You quoted the legislation, he asked you which part. Answer the question.

 

If of course the Firmware would do such a thing. Are you saying I could bump
up the FPS on the EOS300D and burn out the motor? I'd say not! If the
Firmware DID cause a mechanical failure, for sure, no warranty. However, I'm
having a hard time thinking of how or what in the custom functions would
cause any mechanical failure of the camera body? Any ideas?

Cam

 

A limping camera gets no sympathy but a broken door stop seems to get
replaced. Go figure.

 

[crosspost to aus.legal added.

For a background refer to this article:
<http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/02/004258&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=
164&tid=185>]

I believe your example is not 'akin' to what I wrote. In your example, A
car is damaged by over revving, running the engine outside of the
specification for that engine. With the manufacturers firmware this damage
could not have occurred. A modification was made to run the car out of
specification and damage is shown as a direct result of this. The warranty
on the vehicle is NOT void. The damage caused by the over-revving is
chargeable.

If you read what I wrote again ...

As far as I can see there is no modification in the firmware that allows the
camera to operate under any undue stress like that cited in your example of
the vehicle rev limiter.

If the LCD backlight fails on a 300D and that 300D is running a modified
firmware I have my doubts about the legality of the warranty being
dishonoured. Same goes for shutter failure, button failure, mirror falling
off, CMOS imager failure.

Unless it is the firmware that has caused the fault to occur, why would the
warranty be invalid?

They might have a problem covering it, but can they legally not cover it?
Mr Fong claimed that the TPA would allow for the invalidation of warranty, I
have asked Mr Fong to cite the legislation he refers to as I believe the
information he offered to be incorrect. At the same time, if I am incorrect
I would like to know.

FWIW I do not own a 300D and have no interest in 'hacking' one.

 

FYI... I sold the camera to Huey in the first place. He used the Russian
hack to blast his firmware and it killed the camera. No switch on anymore
OK?

All the rubbish you lot are on about is dangerous stuff for people like Huey
who thought he could buy a $1700 camera and for a bit of activity with a PC,
make it into a $2800 camera. Be warned. Many of the hacks getting around
have the potential to kill the cameras just as surely as using an old, hight
voltage flash on the hotshoe.

In advance, sorry to say this publicly Huey...
There is no part of the Trade Practices act requiring manufacturers or
retailers to do anything when a fault is caused by a wilful act of vandalism
by the owner. All the sites you can download these hacks from warn you of
the likely consequences of using the stuff before you start. What is it
about you jokers that makes you think you can get something for nothing?

TA

 

aus.legal ? How profound.

 

I realise that nobody posting in aus.legal would have your depth of
experience or wealth of knowledge Uncle Miro, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

 

The mear fact that you think you have a consumer right is profound. You may
ask anyone you like, its just as useful as asking nobody since the final
choice lays with the repairer not the screaming twit.

 

You'd be surprised.
Having worked for Canons service department in the past, as well as a
couple of Canon-authorised service centres, it used to amaze me how
often Canon were willing to repair stupidity-induced faults under
warranty, purely to retain customer goodwill. (The classic example was
brand new inkjets where the user had failed to remove the bright orange
sealing strip from the ink cartridge - we used to see several of them a
week.)
I can't speak for their policy on modded cameras, but I expect that
their policy would be similar their policy about broken inkjet printers
that had been used with non-Canon ink, which, (at the time I was working
with them) is that they'd charge the customer a service fee *if* they
could prove that *physical damage* had been caused by the 3rd party ink,
but would cover anything else that would normally be covered under
warranty. In the case of DSLRs, I think it's likely that they'd re-flash
the ROM back to the factory version, & if that fixed it, they'd charge
you a service fee. If the fault was still there, they'd most likely fix
it as usual, then give you a lecture about installing hacked firmaware
on it.
If I were to screw up a firmware mod on my own camera, I'd take it to an
authorised service centre, rather than to Canon itself, & just take my
chances on copping a fee.

 

The fact you do get more... for nothing

 

I agree - despite all the gloom spelt out in the warranty the outcome is
often decided by the goodwill of the supplier and the attititude of the
purchaser.

I have had more pleasant surprises than disappointments, even when I have
admitted that I was partly to blame for the failure.

John

 

Yep. I've actually written warranty documents myself (*not* for Canon!),
& they're primarily an arse-covering measure. They're intended to stop
people trying to sue you out of business, rather than to deny reasonable
claims. No matter what many people think, most companies would rather
wear an hour or two of labour & $30 in parts than gain a pissed-off
ex-customer. Mind you, they'll change their tune quick smart if you back
your car over your gizmo & bring it in for warranty service, or expect
them to fix screwed up software every couple of weeks. (And yes, I've
had to deal with customers like this - and worse.)