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

171–180 of 234 posts

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

#171

Post by kube-system »

jhugo wrote: post #153
chrisseaton wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're not entitled by law to take a hammer back if it doesn't work as you expect it to. Yes you are. If it’s not fit for the purpose you’re entitled to return it.

"Works as you expect it to" is not the same thing as "fit for purpose". The purpose of a hammer is (mostly) an objective fact. Your expectations of what the hammer can do, on the other hand, may or may not be reasonable. (Though in this case I think it's perfectly reasonable to claim that the camera is not fit for purpose if the EULA terms were not clearly disclosed before the purchase was made.)

> "Works as you expect it to" is not the same thing as "fit for purpose"

For the purposes of that comment, I meant them to be equivalent ...under the presumption that a typical person knows what a hammer does. (I was avoiding the legalese)

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

#172

Post by inetknght »

red_throwaway wrote: post #85
technothrasher wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. You are typically not entitled to a refund in this situation. Many companies will allow it under a goodwill return policy, but they are not legally obligated in most situations.

I'm pretty sure I would be granted a refund if I asked for one. That being said, I'm not left with a lot of options after returning it because there aren't many comparable alternatives for this class of camera. In fact, I don't know of even one camera that's as high quality without also being almost double the price. RED has a lot of leverage here.

> I'm pretty sure I would be granted a refund if I asked for one.

Good luck getting a full refund without some restocking fee subtracted. Something like 15% of $30,000 is... reaching outside of small claims court

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

#173

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

eli wrote: post #84
johnklos wrote: post #82

RED has always had all sorts of BS licensing gobbleygook. When the first RED cameras finally became available, the software absolute shit. They had all sorts of stuff in their license agreements about not reverse engineering, not redistributing, et cetera. I had to figure out many parts of their software and make wrappers and separate tools so that queues could be started and run without monitoring, because their sof…

Doesn't pretty much all closed-source proprietary software prohibit reverse engineering and redistribution?

Reverse engineering for interop is legal.

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

#174

Post by Tuna-Fish »

kube-system wrote: post #37
_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.

It is legal. But under warranty law, they also have to deliver you a product that works or refund your money.

Depends on jurisdiction. Inside the EU, the EULA is not a valid contract and gives RED no rights to anything.

This is true of any and all "license agreements" that are presented to the user after money has changed hands. You can safely click agree on any such things without actually agreeing to anything.

I don't actually know, but I believe that in the US things are more complex.

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

#175

Post by vmception »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #146
vmception wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 becaus…

>This is an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy Fallacy fallacy. The appeal to authority fallacy would be to claim it's ok for them to do it because they're the best. The OP did not write that. The OP wrote that on the spectrum of how to be worried, since this vendor has a track record of good behavior, and since the EULA pieces are pretty reasonable for the vendor to manage the software (which most film makers li…

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

Thats the discussion I'm choosing to follow, its right there in the title.

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

#177

Post by ipaddr »

zdragnar wrote: post #92
Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #70

Write to the company and ask for clarification and an option to opt-out. This has three benefits: 1) they may give you additional information what exactly they are doing 2) they get information that their customers find it suspicious and may clarify it for everyone and 3) they may actually add an option to opt out

What's more likely is a help desk tech will see the email, maybe ask their boss about it, and ultimately write back that there is no option to opt out. They're not going to provide you with more information, because that would limit their ability to do something in the future (especially since the person writing the response isn't a product manager or engineer and doesn't know anything about it anyway). It's worth a…

Write the CEO directly

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

#178

Post by Brian_K_White »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #107
eganist wrote: post #104

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. 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"

You can't use it without agreeing, unless you are saying there is 3rd party firmware you can install which doesn't have the eula and doesn't perform the data collection and unsolicited updates.

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

#179

Post by usr1106 »

kube-system wrote: post #37
_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.

It is legal. But under warranty law, they also have to deliver you a product that works or refund your money.

At least under German consumer law clauses that are suprising and harmful to the rights of the consumers have been repeatedly declared void and unenforceable by the courts.

However, in this price class I could have my doubts whether consumer laws are applicable. Businesses are less protected, they are supposed to know what they do.

The question was about European laws. There mostly is no such thing (very few exceptions exist, like e.g. GDPR). Laws are national, so you have 30 of them. EU directives set some borderlines for those who are members or associated. But they are not always implemented in a timely manner, and even if they are the details are up to national legislation by design.

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

#180

Post by JaimeThompson »

renewiltord wrote: post #110
JaimeThompson wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

>The incentives force RED to not abuse.

Boeing, Enron, and too many others to list here show that one can't really apply rational thinking when some, not everyone, desire that bonus / stock bump / whatever no matter the long term cost.

Post reply on HN