« on: May 27, 2013, 11:08:52 AM »
Therefore Canon's response is quite correct and honest. If you install ML and the use of ML damages your camera, they don't have to cover. But if ML is not the cause of the damage, they must honor the warranty.
One thing I don't understand about the post: what does it mean that "only Canon is OK" with that? Other companies will refuse to even touch your camera if you installed a 3rd-party firmware - even if it has nothing to do with the damage?
They probably can take that position but not formally say "your warranty is voided". Never underestimate the cleverness of people who want to take a self-serving position on an issue. They could simply claim that part of their service process is to run diagnostic software and any unauthorised firmware would interfere.... blah blah blah.
The fun thing about our legal system is that anyone can do anything they want and your recourse is to sue them and that takes a lot of money and time with an uncertain outcome. And referring back to my above point about being "clever for self-serving purposes", lawyers are the worst of the bunch.
The saving grace is that if you did sue them they would settle very quickly rather than spend the money defending and risk getting a ruling that they must change their policy. If they settle with you and fix your camera/car/whatever they can keep on taking the same position with other customers and just deal with the few who scream the loudest.