DMCA INQUIRY - General Discussion and Assistance - CHDK Forum  

DMCA INQUIRY

  • 3 Replies
  • 1374 Views
DMCA INQUIRY
« on: 02 / August / 2012, 13:03:27 »
Advertisements
Hello to everyone!
Im starting this thread because I'm actually getting active in a thread at DVXusers.net where someone is developing a custom firmware for the NEX-5N.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?259944-Sony-NEX-Axx-Firmware-hacking/page7

There has been some talk about funding and even starting a Kickstarter iniciative under the excuse of research purposes.

Cases like the PS3 with GEOHOT are sacring the developer, specially because the thread is getting pretty popular... but if he wants to go ahead with development he needs funding to buy the cameras.. etc..

So here comes my question.

GEOHOT's lawsuit, as far as I know, was MAINLY because what he was doing allowed people to use pirated game copies..

But, what are the risks for a developer when reverse engeneering a camera's firmware?

Canon has posted their kernel sources, so I dont know what would this mean in regards of the "openness" of the firmware itself.

http://www.sony.net/Products/Linux/DI/category01.html



On a side note, how similar/different is developing for canon and for sony?


Thanks to whoever can help whit this.

*

Online reyalp

  • ******
  • 12880
Re: DMCA INQUIRY
« Reply #1 on: 02 / August / 2012, 16:11:08 »
Canon has posted their kernel sources, so I dont know what would this mean in regards of the "openness" of the firmware itself.
I think you mean Sony, not Canon.

Concerning the actual question, I think you will find that random opinions from the internet are worth every penny you pay for them. If you want a real answer, you should consult a lawyer who specializes in IP law.
Don't forget what the H stands for.

Re: DMCA INQUIRY
« Reply #2 on: 02 / August / 2012, 16:23:42 »
Hello to everyone!

Welcome!


Canon has posted their kernel sources, so I dont know what would this mean in regards of the "openness" of the firmware itself.

http://www.sony.net/Products/Linux/DI/category01.html

You meant Sony, not Canon?

But, what are the risks for a developer when reverse engeneering a camera's firmware?

I'm not a lawyer, but I know that might depend on the law of developer's country. I've read some time ago that in Poland reverse engeneering is not prohibited. Even when program license says the reverse engeneering is prohibited by the author it is not. I think it's not the case in USA. But once again - you might ask a lawyer. Here it seems nobody 'really' cares about that.

The other problem is what is in the interest of the company. Nobody saw Canon fighting with CHDK even if developers break their rights (and they did it many times posting firmware dumps in some file sharing servers). Why? Because CHDK causes many people to buy rather Canon P&S than other. I wouldn't buy Sony or Fuji or any other camera until they would be scriptable:) So I believe CHDK developers shouldn't be afraid.


BTW - I see that Sony uses Linux kernel? Doesn't that cause whole firmware infected by GPL? Can't we force them to publish whole source?
« Last Edit: 02 / August / 2012, 16:25:32 by outslider »
if (2*b || !2*b) {
    cout<<question
}

Compile error: poor Yorick

*

Online reyalp

  • ******
  • 12880
Re: DMCA INQUIRY
« Reply #3 on: 02 / August / 2012, 21:52:26 »
BTW - I see that Sony uses Linux kernel? Doesn't that cause whole firmware infected by GPL? Can't we force them to publish whole source?
Sony publishes the full source. My understanding is that they use a bootloader which prohibits loading code not signed by them. Nothing in the GPL obliges them to publish the code or the keys required to make a bootable image.
Don't forget what the H stands for.


 

Related Topics