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

Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

romanzipp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 665 posts

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#441

Post by seabass-labrax »

panzi wrote: post #426
walthamstow wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hoo boy we have some classics in that category in the UK. My personal fave is when morning TV host Lorraine Kelly successfully argued she wasn’t hosting as herself but acting a character called Lorraine Kelly, with very favourable tax consequences.

I'm not from the UK, but wasn't there also a cake Vs biscuits thing for tax reasons?

Yes, Jaffa Cakes - minature sponge cakes flavoured with Jaffa oranges. Cakes aren't subject to Value Added Tax in the UK, which allows them to be sold more cheaply to the consumer or have a greater profit margin. A tribunal confirmed that they are true, real and genuine cakes, so you may feel entitled to enjoy your tax-free treat!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandco...

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#442

Post by JBiserkov »

panzi wrote: post #426
walthamstow wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hoo boy we have some classics in that category in the UK. My personal fave is when morning TV host Lorraine Kelly successfully argued she wasn’t hosting as herself but acting a character called Lorraine Kelly, with very favourable tax consequences.

I'm not from the UK, but wasn't there also a cake Vs biscuits thing for tax reasons?

And windows being covered with bricks for tax reasons.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#443

Post by dnh44 »

lazide wrote: post #408
dnh44 wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not 100% sure as they didn't introduce themselves but whoever called was able to get the phone number that the IP address was linked to and I assume both would have to have been involved in order to do that.

Creepy. If you don’t mind me asking - eastern eu?

Yes; former communist but not former soviet union. Old habits die hard I guess.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#444

Post by jeffhuys »

School-Cotton wrote: post #275
contrast wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thread is about bad things because of tax policy, your post is about a good thing because of health policy - but you don’t say it’s a good thing, or that it’s about heath not taxes. The post pointing this out has different content to yours, which reads as if your meaning is “this reminds me of another bad thing caused by tax policies” - even if that’s not what you meant.

> you don’t say it’s a good thing But I also never said OP’s anecdote was a bad thing. (Why shouldn’t countries be able to tax video cameras coming in…). What’s the difference?

You can’t win arguments on the internet. Best case: they ghost you. Cowards, I say!

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#445

Post by RajT88 »

Saris wrote: post #382
virtualritz wrote: post #224

That's reminds me when I was in South East Asia a few years back and wanted to do some time lapse or series photography with my Sony Alpha a7ii. A camera that I had paid close to 2k€ for (just body, no glass). It required an app to be installed on the camera that was paid-for. Which in term required the camera to be connected to a WiFi. Imagine discovering this while on a trip in the jungle or the desert or whatever…

That's pretty wild for such a popular brand. My panasonic G9 just has that stuff built in.

Not that unusual for Sony.

They have a lot of WTF product design decisions.

I have a running joke with friends about how there must be some terrible engineer who is the CEO's son or something that gets to design one feature in every product.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#447

Post by KMnO4 »

virtualritz wrote: post #224

That's reminds me when I was in South East Asia a few years back and wanted to do some time lapse or series photography with my Sony Alpha a7ii. A camera that I had paid close to 2k€ for (just body, no glass). It required an app to be installed on the camera that was paid-for. Which in term required the camera to be connected to a WiFi. Imagine discovering this while on a trip in the jungle or the desert or whatever…

Heh, your experience is not isolated. I needed the timelapse app when I was several days deep into Algonquin park in northern Ontario. I had barely a bar of service, so I had to hoist my phone up a tree with a rope to get enough data that I could tether the camera to it. Thanks Sony.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#448

Post by brushfoot »

mzajc wrote: post #398
brushfoot wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's only because they're greedy No, it's because Canon didn't sell OP a webcam. There's no expectation for them to provide webcam software. If someone wants an external camera that doubles as a webcam with no adapters, that's totally fine for them! They should shop with that in mind.

OP bought a camera, and the camera can be used as a webcam - but deliberately not with standard protocols. Pretending the limitation is of technical nature rather than a result of corporate greed is both delusional and harmful to consumer rights.

Nothing about this is deceptive or a violation of consumer rights. Far from it.

This is common for cameras. My Sony works in the same way. It can be used as a webcam using HDMI and a capture card. Canon clearly states this in their marketing for OP's camera.

OP apparently didn't understand this, but the solution is simple -- get an HDMI cable and a capture card.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#449

Post by woodrowbarlow »

moomin wrote: post #437
halgir wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of when lawyers successfully argued that X-Men are not human, so that their action figures would be classified as "toys" rather than "dolls" and thus charged a lower tariff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_Biz%2C_Inc._v._United_Stat...

In universe, arguing the X-Men are not human would put you firmly in the villain category.

exactly, that was core to the whole plot; oppressed mutants fighting to have their basic human rights recognized.

Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam

#450

Post by bhickey »

brushfoot wrote: post #362
baxtr wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s basically the same though, isn’t it?

That's what the marketers wanted us to think, sure. It's like me trying to sell you a car that can "turn into" a boat with the right attachments. Notice I didn't say how much the attachments cost.

Respectfully, you're just making things up.
Post reply on HN