Canon's Viltrox Lens Ban
Sep 6, 2022 07:45:00 #
According to canonrumors the lens ban by Canon regarding Viltrox RF lenses is because of patent infringement by Viltrox. That is the information released by Canon of Germany. Despite all the hype and panic on social media it does not appear that Canon has taken any action against any other manufacturer. Of course, others may halt production if they believe that they could be infringing but there seems to be no reliable info on that yet.
So, chill out! Wait for the full story before ranting about how evil Canon is.
So, chill out! Wait for the full story before ranting about how evil Canon is.
Sep 6, 2022 08:14:14 #
LFingar wrote:
According to canonrumors the lens ban by Canon reg... (show quote)
I don't see how a company can copy a lens without edging into copyright territory. I'm assuming that all lens makers copyright their mounting designs.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
Sep 6, 2022 08:24:14 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I don't see how a company can copy a lens without edging into copyright territory. I'm assuming that all lens makers copyright their mounting designs.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
Patent Infringement.
Copyrights are for intellectual property things like books, magazines, music, photographs, and other graphic arts. Trademarks are names and logos.Sep 6, 2022 08:25:19 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I don't see how a company can copy a lens without edging into copyright territory. I'm assuming that all lens makers copyright their mounting designs.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
It is the competing company's responsibility not to stray into patent territory, even if it means not making the product. That's the purpose of patents. Would you want to spend time and money developing a component just to see someone else copy it and in doing so detract from your sales and income? I wouldn't. Let them develop their own component. The patent infringement in this case no doubt involves some component or components of the lens, not the lens itself. If Canon or anyone else designs a better widget then they have the right to that widget and the income it generates for the life of the patent.
Sep 6, 2022 08:26:09 #
Sep 6, 2022 08:46:15 #
Sep 6, 2022 09:05:10 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I don't see how a company can copy a lens without edging into copyright territory. I'm assuming that all lens makers copyright their mounting designs.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
This reminds me of the current Right to Repair situation. Manufacturers want the public to rely on them for absolutely everything. Have you tried to buy a shop manual for your car recently? I've had manuals for all my cars since 1965, but now they're not available.
They are not worried about car owners repairing their own cars, they are concerned with Independent Garages taking business from the dealers.
There is a big hassle between farmers and contractors with John Deere (I think) JD will not release info, so the owners can access the electronics/computers on the equipment and they can and do monitor the equipment and can shut it down when every THEY see something wrong, then the OWNER has to call them and JD will restart the equip so it can be loaded, JD retains the ownership of all operating systems according to them.
Sep 6, 2022 09:09:17 #
Manglesphoto wrote:
They are not worried about car owners repairing th... (show quote)
Right. Money! Money! Money!
Sep 6, 2022 09:22:44 #
camshot
Loc: Peterborough ontario Canada
China has no worries about infringing at all, they have copied anything they want to produce.
Sep 6, 2022 09:23:41 #
I can't see how a lens mount can be patented. A lens mount is how a particular manufacturer chooses to connect something to their equipment and I wouldn't think it is can be patented since there would not be any novel created technology about it. Of course I'm not a patent attorney....
Sep 6, 2022 09:27:44 #
LCD wrote:
I can't see how a lens mount can be patented. A lens mount is how a particular manufacturer chooses to connect something to their equipment and I wouldn't think it is can be patented since there would not be any novel created technology about it. Of course I'm not a patent attorney....
Nor very knowledgeable of digital cameras either.
Sep 6, 2022 09:33:56 #
LCD wrote:
I can't see how a lens mount can be patented. A lens mount is how a particular manufacturer chooses to connect something to their equipment and I wouldn't think it is can be patented since there would not be any novel created technology about it. Of course I'm not a patent attorney....
Of course it can be patented. A mount or pretty much any other component. The technology doesn't have to be new it just has to be different or function differently from other patented technologies.
Sep 6, 2022 09:37:36 #
LFingar wrote:
Of course it can be patented. A mount or pretty much any other component. The technology doesn't have to be new it just has to be different or function differently from other patented technologies.
Sep 6, 2022 09:46:22 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Right. Money! Money! Money!
Of course it is about money. Nobody goes into business not to make money. On top of that, publicly traded companies have to make as much as possible in order for people to buy their stock. How many people do you think will buy stock in a company showing a history of good returns vs a company with a history of low returns. Even the largest companies take out loans to finance expansion and such. Low yielding companies, if they can even get a loan, will pay higher interest rates.
Everybody complains about companies making money as if they would do it differently if they were in charge. Some industries do gouge. Big oil being a prime example. Most though are just following standard business models.
Sep 6, 2022 09:48:36 #
LFingar wrote:
Of course it is about money. Nobody goes into busi... (show quote)
Catering to stockholders has done more harm than good. Boeing is a perfect example. Remember the Great Depression?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.