Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 234 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#101

Post by vmception »

implements wrote: post #8

Looks like boilerplate to me. 4 is telemetry, with a catch-all that any data may be transmitted - which is necessary if a crash dump might contain image data. 5 is updates, with the catch-all that updates may break stuff or remove features (often buggy features or features too rarely used to be worth maintaining). Pretty standard stuff for anything containing software, and perhaps because the camera is so expensive t…

> RED Cameras are good and widely used, iirc - probably worth giving them the benefit of the doubt as they’ll not want to damage their reputation and profits by abusing their T&Cs.

This is an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy. That particular niche of users has likely never brought it up to people attention. EULA are rarely brought up at all, and when they are its just in some software within tech circles because tech sector enthusiasts like to review. It doesn't matter that high powered hollywood execs and prosumer gearheads have used it and ignored it. It is very valid to assume it simply never has been challenged.

The question "is it legal" not "will it hurt me" not "will it hurt them".

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#102

Post by dahart »

car_analogy wrote: post #63
jrockway wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're entitled to return it for a full refund. The same would be true if you took some video and didn't like how the camera worked, or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. I get the feeling that you want more than that (like a custom license agreement, or some punishment for the sales person for not mentioning the EULA), and I don't think you're going to get that. Return it for a refund, RED has to sell…

> I get the feeling that you want more than that Like the GDPR? I'm not an expert on it, but I think it does forbid a few of the liberties RED has taken with this EULA.

That doesn’t help US citizens.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#104

Post by eganist »

_tom_ wrote: post #16
wmf wrote: post #5

AFAIK these EULAs are legal. In reality, RED isn't exfiltrating their customers' video (the files are enormous so people would notice) and they would go out of business if they did. Probably every product has some objectionable clause in their EULA which no one reads, so you're better off not reading it and moving on with your life. If you want to be a freedom fighter, go work for the EFF; if you want to make video,…

The purchase is completed before he gets it home and finds new conditions being imposed. That the part that I question about being legal.

> The purchase is completed before he gets it home and finds new conditions being imposed. That the part that I question about being legal.

My experience (IANAL and I don't know the specific laws here): you can return the product if you don't agree to the bundled licensing terms, generally even if you've opened it and encountered the licensing terms after the fact (though not every retailer may appreciate this one).

I've gotten a few "non-refundable" refunds after being given legal terms post-purchase that I didn't agree to. Most recently a talent release for an event. But in every case, I had to prove that the agreements weren't available pre-purchase.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#105

Post by pbhjpbhj »

If the EULA wasn't notified to you at the point of lease, or indeed of the transaction was described as a sale, then it's fraud as you were misled as to the nature of the product in order to provide a financial gain for Red. I think you have a good basis for a small claims court case to recoup spending on peripherals.

I think it could go either way, but sadly the establishment aren't keen on limiting they overreach of companies which mislead when they call things sales and which try to own the World through Eulas.

Thought: if their EULA is lawful then a post-transaction contract from your side should be lawful too ...? (YMMV, I am clearly not a lawyer and this is so far from legal advice.)

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#106

Post by red_throwaway »

danamit wrote: post #46

I'd just use it, they have the right to collect and you have the right to prevent them from collecting/updating.

Maybe but I'm not certain I have the technical capability of preventing these things. Not while the camera has a wifi radio and closed source firmware. I suppose one could build their own custom camera module which features a network stack, constantly de-authing every wifi channel as long as the camera is powered on. Not super practical but it might be a fun weekend project.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#107

Post by EMIRELADERO »

eganist wrote: post #104
_tom_ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purchase is completed before he gets it home and finds new conditions being imposed. That the part that I question about being legal.

> The purchase is completed before he gets it home and finds new conditions being imposed. That the part that I question about being legal. My experience (IANAL and I don't know the specific laws here): you can return the product if you don't agree to the bundled licensing terms, generally even if you've opened it and encountered the licensing terms after the fact (though not every retailer may appreciate this one).…

Or you can just use the product normally without agreeing to it. Look up "unconscionability"

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#108

Post by readbeard »

Granted, I'm not in the target market, but I don't understand why people keep buying RED cameras. They do stuff like this, charge an arm and a leg for what should be commodity parts but aren't, and claim dubious patent protections on things like compressed RAW video (IIRC, at least one compressed RAW image format existed prior to the release of the RED One).

With really attractive options from companies like Blackmagic, Sony, and ARRI, what's so appealing about RED?

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#109

Post by dymk »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #69
jrockway wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're entitled to return it for a full refund. The same would be true if you took some video and didn't like how the camera worked, or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. I get the feeling that you want more than that (like a custom license agreement, or some punishment for the sales person for not mentioning the EULA), and I don't think you're going to get that. Return it for a refund, RED has to sell…

Why shouldn't they be entitled to use the product fully without being bound by the EULA? Unconscionability could be at play here.

Because contract law is a thing. OP can return the camera and get a different one, or they can agree to the usage terms.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#110

Post by renewiltord »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #86
et2o wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the answer. Why would the manufacturer of a professional-targeted camera take an action that would destroy their business?

>Why would the manufacturer of a professional-targeted camera take an action that would destroy their business? To make the next quarters number look better.

It won't. Any material so created would immediately receive an injunction at a court and the risk would be so high that you wouldn't even do it because you can't use the material. Also, there are zero people in movies who can tell you whether a movie will succeed. You can't make the bet.

The incentives force RED to not abuse.

Post reply on HN