« on: September 20, 2012, 11:03:13 PM »
I suppose that you think that multimillion dollar center in Hollywood to support customers of Canon's Cinema products came for free, and the people working there should donate their time. After all, its immoral to charge for your work. All that makes up part of the cost of the product.The programmer does not charge for every Camera.... this is not the same as coding for a solution. There are definitely ethical considerations here... Canon is flaunting them.... has been flaunting them for a while...
I agree to some extent that consumers can pay a bit extra for a few more lines of code... but in my book, what Canon is doing, is called "Usury".... it could be argued to be ethical, but it is definitely immoral.
Flaunting ethical considerations? Immorality? Sheesh. Canon is running a business. They're not a church or a charity. They're selling what amounts to a luxury good, not charging impoverished, starving people thousands of dollars for a morsel of food and a sip of water. Their goal is to make a profit. Period. So long as they're not breaking the law, it's all fair game. If they want to hand paint a fuschia ring on the nifty-fifty using sparkly nail polish, call it a L3 Ultra-Cine lens, and charge $50,000 for it, they can. If you don't want it, don't buy it. If one filmmaker who's obsessed with the color fuschia buys it, and Canon makes a 3,000-fold profit on that sale, good for Canon.
If Fujio Mitarai points a real cannon (artillery piece) at your house, and threatens to shoot cannonballs through it with your family inside unless you buy a 1D C, that's unethical and immoral (not to mention illegal). But they can charge whatever price they want for their products - ethics and morality are irrelevant.
So we agree it is immoral
You need to look at the whole picture, not just a tiny portion.