canon won't have a problem with ML.
Canon *will* have a problem with ml if ml isn't helping their sales as a unannounced big feature but makes people not buy the 1dc. I gather Canon will make this position clear one way or another, and I hope the main ml devs will make it as clear that they do not want to cause Canon losses or profit from hacking the 1dx.
Isn't it that ML is just running beside Canon's software? It's not modifying the code or any hardware. Right? It's just like some software running inside your OS. E.g., if I make a program that runs in Windows and uses the intrinsic OS commands like showing the clock time, even hacking into memory management, does that make my program illegal? For me 1DX can be looked at as platform. Why do you think Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and Samyang were able to make those 3rd party lenses? They even had to reverse engineer the way the lens is communicating with the body. Isn't this a higher form of hacking into the system?
If I read it right, another reason why Canon is differentiating 1Dx and 1Dc is that tax laws in some countries are different for stills and movie and even the size of the output for movie cameras. Of course you can't discount the fact that they will earn more through introducing a different software for the same hardware. That's why I'm looking at ML like an open-source 3rd party software something like JAVA.