Ilkka Nissila

intoPIX's patents describe the algorithm. If it is the same as used in another previous product then it is unlikely to have been granted a patent.  Of course this assumes the patent office can understand the algorithms and the novelties in context, which is not necessarily the case. Given the patent text it should be possible to implement it.

intoPix's web site lists Nikon Z8 and Z9's N-RAW as using TicoRAW for stills and video (Zf doesn't have N-RAW video but does have the corresponding stills compression options HE and HE* which are similar to Z8's and Z9's HE and HE* so we can safely guess it too is TicoRAW).
Nikon's Z9, Z8, and Zf manuals state that they are "powered by intoPIX technology". Z8 and Zf were launched in 2023, so there you have mentions "after 2022". 
Since RED's earlier lawsuit against Jinni Tech was also withdrawn when the latter used the same argument as Nikon did with the same outcome, yet Jinni Tech didn't need to purchase RED the company to reach this outcome, so we can fairly safely assume Nikon's decision to purchase RED is unrelated to the lawsuit. Since Nikon's argument is that the patents are invalid they aren't likely to sue others for infringing those invalid patents. But RED may have other patents or aspects of patents that Nikon may want to use. And very likely they do want to enter the high-end video camera market since some customers won't purchase hybrids without system compatibility with higher-end video cameras.

Nikon use intoPIX's TicoRAW  for high-efficiency encoding of raw stills and raw video. It's a different algorithm from what RED is using. RED's patent has been suggested to be invalid anyway, as RED demonstrated it in a camera more than one year before applying for the patent (which was Nikon's counter-argument when RED sued them and so the case was settled outside of court, which also happened with Jinni Tech who used a similar argument). I doubt very much Nikon bought RED for the patents but simply to get a foothold in the higher-end video camera market.
 

Nikon use intoPIX's TicoRAW  for high-efficiency encoding of raw stills and raw video. It's a different algorithm from what RED is using. RED's patent has been suggested to be invalid anyway, as RED demonstrated it in a camera more than one year before applying for the patent (which was Nikon's counter-argument when RED sued them and so the case was settled outside of court, which also happened with Jinni Tech who used a similar argument). I doubt very much Nikon bought RED for the patents but simply to get a foothold in the higher-end video camera market.
 

The Mk II has subject-detection available also in wide-area L AF box, instead of only in the full-frame auto-area AF as in the Mk I. For me limiting the search area for the subject is key to obtaining controlled and reliable results in photographing people. In the newer Zf, the AF box size and shape can be adjusted with many different options and subject-detection is also available there. For me these are the most typical modes I use the cameras in, and the most useful as it gives just the right compromise between user control and automation for me.
 
I would expect the Z6 III to feature also the same custom area AF as the Zf has (which is ahead of the Z8 and Z9 in the number of box sizes available).

You need to go to the custom settings menu and the g settings (video). There is a setting where you can assign the hi-res zoom to a pair of custom function buttons (such as Fn1 to zoom in and Fn2 to zoom out). You can also adjust the zoom speed. In addition to buttons on the camera itself, it's possible to control the zoom from the remote video grip that Nikon makes. The main limitation of the high-res zoom is that it limits the AF area to a central wide area of the frame. You can't move the box off center or control how big it is. So you lose some control over the autofocus. Subject detection is available though. I guess the limitation is because the box sizes are tied to the phase-detection sensor positions and those positions with the zoomed-in frame would then change as you zoom. But other than that I like the feature.

These things can be done. I just configured my video shooting bank A for Prores 422 HQ 25 fps and 1/50s SDR, and bank B for h.265 4K 50 fps 10-bit 1/100s with N-Log, and I can now switch between banks by pressing and holding Fn3 (which I programmed to act as shooting bank selection button from the video custom settings custom controls menu) and rotating the main command dial. Very handy.

It doesn't quite work like that. If you shoot a sequence at 120 fps & 1/240s with the GS camera, and compare the results after processing (by taking the images and processing them to reduce noise) to native RS camera at 24 fps, 1/48s, then the latter will still have more dynamic range (unless an ND filter was needed to get the slow shutter speed in too bright light).
 
Phone cameras get away with a lot of stuff, including somehow merging the images even in the presence of moving parts in the image by algorithms only because the images are viewed as a tiny part of the human visual field so the imperfect guesses by the AI don't bother us as much as they would if they were shown on large screens. The images often look unnatural and fake to those who are experienced in looking at actual photographs, though.

Mechanical (focal plane) shutter produces some rolling shutter. You can see it e.g. if photographing a propeller plane or helicopter at fast shutter speeds. You can also see it when there is artificial light that flickers, in the past the advice was to use a slow shutter speed to avoid the banding from fluorescent lights; today the lights are often LED based but still there are circumstances where the lights or screens show banding even when photographing with mechanical shutter. The GS eliminates this problem. I would think that photojournalists, sports and music photographers would like it, but it's a pricey camera for sure.
Golf, yes, quite likely there even the fastest rolling shutter would show distortion, and the club swings quite fast so you can get some interesting timings at 120 fps or 240 fps. But those are kind of special applications. I guess specialists who work on these kind of sports with very fast motion would get it.

But how much would you be willing to pay extra for the larger sensor and lenses that cover it? After all, many lenses have masks that minimize flare but also limit the image coverage to a rectangle.  Let's say lenses for a square 36 mm times 36 mm sonsor would have 1/2 stop smaller apertures and 50% higher price as a result, and camera body would also be 50% more expensive. Flash sync speed would be 1/125 s and sensor read time 50% longer. Would you still want it, and would you expect that everyone would be fine with it so that mass production would be realistic and square sensors would replace rectangular ones all over the market?

I think the problem originates from photography (and video) being originally quite difficult to do technically so that when there is a really good photo or short movie, it was viewed with excitement, and people gathered around online to celebrate such things and try to learn the craft themselves. Online forums were quite active.
 
Eventually the cameras got better, easier to use and cheaper, and so hundreds of millions of people bought them, and making a decent photograph was no longer unusual, not a luxury or a rarity. Thus it became progressively more difficult to make a living from it, or be noticed with your images (whether amateur or professional). Forum activity reflects this - if it is no longer possible to make a difference with photos or videos then fewer people will enjoy the pursuit, or chatting about it. Of course, it is still possible but there is such a quantity of it readily available for consumption that people no longer stop to watch this content. And they don't value it because they don't see it as special.  Even if the photo is special, they are looking at it on a tiny screen the size of their hands at reading distance away, and that's really small. If you try to come back to it, chances are you will not find it again, as the feed has changed with new material. Rarely is the creator of the photograph mentioned online. What's the point then?
 
I think rather than give information for free, a lot of people are giving workshops and may try to commercialize their knowledge. In the beginning of the internet, people were so excited about sharing and it was not about making money.
 
Social media tends to show people what they've liked before, so then all the content gets likes and there is no space for criticism, or if you do, then your comment probably gets deleted, you might become unfriended, or get a fierce rebuttal to the criticism. No one bothers to read through the discourse. Forums are full of discussions where disagreements and agreements are on more equal footing, but in social media, it's all about likes, and agreeing with the opinion of the poster. The algorithms ensure that you basically only see things that are similar to what you have "liked" before. And if you do give a more neutral or negative comment, people get offended as you're clearly not subscribing to the same bubble that they are. There is no room for genuine discussion on social media.
 
That people don't read any more is a serious problem. It means they aren't being informed, and they probably aren't thinking much, either. Finding facts in videos is very time-consuming and that medium is more suited for dissemination of stories, emotions, etc. and experiences whereas text and illustrations usually are better in disseminating facts. All these media have their place and should be supported. How this happens, I don't know. Personally I enjoy watching videos from time to time, movies, documentaries etc. but find that often it is faster to find the information I'm looking for outside of the video medium. I would be surprised if young people can get through life without reading.

I have had the Z8 since late May and have not experienced any heat-related warnings or other signs of overheating. I live in Finland so our weather is not like Florida but we've had 28 C days. When shooting video, I have used mostly Prores 422 HQ in 4K/25, 4K/50 or 1080p/50 but also tested 4K/120 h.265 and they all worked fine in and out of doors. The most I shot on a day was about 200 GB of video onto CFexpress type B (325 GB ProGrade Digital Cobalt). I've also used Sony 128 GB CFexpress and those didn't overheat in the time required to fill up the card in 4K/25 Prores 422 HQ but the card was very warm to the touch afterwards. 
 
Tests published on youtube by Ricci Chera (who works for Nikon School UK, so keep that in mind), Gerald Undone and others generally found that the Z8 can overheat in the most data-intensive video modes in about 30 min if using memory cards that tend to run hot, but using the right cards (Delkin Black is reported to run the coolest, Prograde Digital Cobalt is also good), the camera typically runs out of battery (2 hours on one charge of the EN-EL15c) before overheating, according to those reports. Both Delkin Black and Prograde Cobalt cards are sometimes significantly discounted at B&H, so if getting a Z8, one may want to look out for those deals. My own experience confirms that the Prograde Cobalt seems to run less hot than the Sony and I'm happy with the purchase although these cards aren't exactly cheap. For longer recording times I would likely go with Delkin Power as those are available in larger capacities.
 
I love the Prores 422 HQ; such amazing detail and color. I have no experience shooting 8K.

I have had the Z8 since late May and have not experienced any heat-related warnings or other signs of overheating. I live in Finland so our weather is not like Florida but we've had 28 C days. When shooting video, I have used mostly Prores 422 HQ in 4K/25, 4K/50 or 1080p/50 but also tested 4K/120 h.265 and they all worked fine in and out of doors. The most I shot on a day was about 200 GB of video onto CFexpress type B (325 GB ProGrade Digital Cobalt). I've also used Sony 128 GB CFexpress and those didn't overheat in the time required to fill up the card in 4K/25 Prores 422 HQ but the card was very warm to the touch afterwards. 
 
Tests published on youtube by Ricci Chera (who works for Nikon School UK, so keep that in mind), Gerald Undone and others generally found that the Z8 can overheat in the most data-intensive video modes in about 30 min if using memory cards that tend to run hot, but using the right cards (Delkin Black is reported to run the coolest, Prograde Digital Cobalt is also good), the camera typically runs out of battery (2 hours on one charge of the EN-EL15c) before overheating, according to those reports. Both Delkin Black and Prograde Cobalt cards are sometimes significantly discounted at B&H, so if getting a Z8, one may want to look out for those deals. My own experience confirms that the Prograde Cobalt seems to run less hot than the Sony and I'm happy with the purchase although these cards aren't exactly cheap. For longer recording times I would likely go with Delkin Power as those are available in larger capacities.
 
I love the Prores 422 HQ; such amazing detail and color. I have no experience shooting 8K.

I have had the Z8 since late May and have not experienced any heat-related warnings or other signs of overheating. I live in Finland so our weather is not like Florida but we've had 28 C days. When shooting video, I have used mostly Prores 422 HQ in 4K/25, 4K/50 or 1080p/50 but also tested 4K/120 h.265 and they all worked fine in and out of doors. The most I shot on a day was about 200 GB of video onto CFexpress type B (325 GB ProGrade Digital Cobalt). I've also used Sony 128 GB CFexpress and those didn't overheat in the time required to fill up the card in 4K/25 Prores 422 HQ but the card was very warm to the touch afterwards. 
 
Tests published on youtube by Ricci Chera (who works for Nikon School UK, so keep that in mind), Gerald Undone and others generally found that the Z8 can overheat in the most data-intensive video modes in about 30 min if using memory cards that tend to run hot, but using the right cards (Delkin Black is reported to run the coolest, Prograde Digital Cobalt is also good), the camera typically runs out of battery (2 hours on one charge of the EN-EL15c) before overheating, according to those reports. Both Delkin Black and Prograde Cobalt cards are sometimes significantly discounted at B&H, so if getting a Z8, one may want to look out for those deals. My own experience confirms that the Prograde Cobalt seems to run less hot than the Sony and I'm happy with the purchase although these cards aren't exactly cheap. For longer recording times I would likely go with Delkin Power as those are available in larger capacities.
 
I love the Prores 422 HQ; such amazing detail and color. I have no experience shooting 8K.

I have had the Z8 since late May and have not experienced any heat-related warnings or other signs of overheating. I live in Finland so our weather is not like Florida but we've had 28 C days. When shooting video, I have used mostly Prores 422 HQ in 4K/25, 4K/50 or 1080p/50 but also tested 4K/120 h.265 and they all worked fine in and out of doors. The most I shot on a day was about 200 GB of video onto CFexpress type B (325 GB ProGrade Digital Cobalt). I've also used Sony 128 GB CFexpress and those didn't overheat in the time required to fill up the card in 4K/25 Prores 422 HQ but the card was very warm to the touch afterwards. 
 
Tests published on youtube by Ricci Chera (who works for Nikon School UK, so keep that in mind), Gerald Undone and others generally found that the Z8 can overheat in the most data-intensive video modes in about 30 min if using memory cards that tend to run hot, but using the right cards (Delkin Black is reported to run the coolest, Prograde Digital Cobalt is also good), the camera typically runs out of battery (2 hours on one charge of the EN-EL15c) before overheating, according to those reports. Both Delkin Black and Prograde Cobalt cards are sometimes significantly discounted at B&H, so if getting a Z8, one may want to look out for those deals. My own experience confirms that the Prograde Cobalt seems to run less hot than the Sony and I'm happy with the purchase although these cards aren't exactly cheap. For longer recording times I would likely go with Delkin Power as those are available in larger capacities.
 
I love the Prores 422 HQ; such amazing detail and color. I have no experience shooting 8K.

IBIS with non-CPU lenses works if you type in the focal length and maximum aperture into the list of non-CPU lenses that you use. This includes mechanical-only lenses that don't have electrical contacts.
 
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/sum_non-cpu_lens_data_guid-fac0444d-3965-c25a-4c18-84574cb10167_285.html
 
After typing in the data for the non-CPU lenses, you can then select from the list the actual one that you are using and the data is recalled. This can be programmed to a custom function button.
 
The AF speed in video recording is adjustable:
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/csmg_af_speed_guid-a4c4cd1b-0ad3-5c90-eac7-5c2fb524a4b5_247.html
 
and tracking sensitivity also:
 
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/csmg_af_tracking_sensitivity_guid-54657d66-753f-7fcb-b56b-2b78446094a0_248.html
 
For me the video AF has been excellent on the Z8.

IBIS with non-CPU lenses works if you type in the focal length and maximum aperture into the list of non-CPU lenses that you use. This includes mechanical-only lenses that don't have electrical contacts.
 
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/sum_non-cpu_lens_data_guid-fac0444d-3965-c25a-4c18-84574cb10167_285.html
 
After typing in the data for the non-CPU lenses, you can then select from the list the actual one that you are using and the data is recalled. This can be programmed to a custom function button.
 
The AF speed in video recording is adjustable:
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/csmg_af_speed_guid-a4c4cd1b-0ad3-5c90-eac7-5c2fb524a4b5_247.html
 
and tracking sensitivity also:
 
https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z8/en/csmg_af_tracking_sensitivity_guid-54657d66-753f-7fcb-b56b-2b78446094a0_248.html
 
For me the video AF has been excellent on the Z8.

I'm not a lawyer but I guess that if a court decides the patent is invalid, RED would lose all income related to license agreements based on that patent. Since they pulled the lawsuit, the other companies cannot automatically stop paying license fees if they have agreed to do so as the patent hasn't been invalidated officially.

I had a feeling the case was going to be dismissed. Here's why - Nikon was approaching the case with evidence that Red should never have been granted the patent in the first place. None of the other companies Red sued took this approach. My guess is that Red realized there was a good chance they could lose the case. Rather than risk having their patent taken away, they walked away instead.

Nikon's compressed NEF stills (from the D2X era onwards) are indeed visually lossless (the highlights have high SNR but also high shot noise and they simply drop out some of the least significant bits which are covered by the shot noise in the highlights and that's how they achieved visually lossless compression) but the Nikon compression (of the D2X era) only reduces the file size by a small amount; the compression ratio is not as high as in the Red or the Intopix compression algorithms (the latter being used in the Z9). It is extremely difficult to see any difference between the D2X era (visually lossless) compressed and lossless compressed NEFs (and you'd need to do very aggressive curves adjustment to see any difference at all). But the difference in file size between the two formats is small. Red's approach could be considered to be an advancement in the state of the art by providing a higher degree of visually lossless compression than Nikon's. But Intopix's algorithm used in the Z9 also provides high compression ratios and was awared a patent. It is used by the Z9 for both stills and video. One could argue that since raw video is a trivial extension of raw stills at sufficiently high fps (24 or higher) and Nikon are simply using (visually lossless) compression on each frame (as they did in their still cameras since at least since the D2X) the use of such a method to record a raw video is a trivial extension of what Nikon did in the past, only this time with higher resolution and higher frame rate. The compression algorithm itself that is used by the Z9 for high efficiency raw stills and raw video is documented in Intopix's patent. Since it was awarded a patent it clearly includes a new inventive step. RED seem to claim in their lawsuit that Nikon are using RED's technology and not someone else's. Interesting. The patent system was created to foster innovation and to allow the rising of sufficient funding for research and development of new useful things. Here it is used by one company to try to block competition which is offering a superior product (in some ways, i.e. autofocus) at a 90% lower price (maybe more) from entering the market (which is not really the same market as the Z9 is mainly a still camera with some video capabilities and most of its purchasers are likely mainly using it for still photography simply because Nikon isn't a prominent video let alone cinema brand). If RED prevail then this is an example of the patent system damaging the American customers' opportunities to purchase competitive gear and not in any way fostering innovation. Perhaps the customers can just purchase their Z9's from overseas in the future.

Canon & Adobe under the same ownership would create a problem - a market-controlling monopoly which wouldn't have been good for the users; it would have been pretty disasterous if Adobe software only worked with Canon camera files, which is no doubt what would have happened under their ownership.
I think the approach of using the mobile phone as the connection hub to the world is sensible, and camera manufacturers have been working to integrated connectivity to their ILCs. It's a bit quirky to use but it does work. Screens have been growing, and three of my four ILCs have touch-screen functionality. There are lots of so-called computational tools in the camera including focus stacking, single-shot tone-mapping, mutli-shot HDR, dozens of different visual effects, and basic editing tools right within the camera. A lot of people claim that these things are missing from cameras but they're not. Many photographers laugh at these features because they want more control and the ability to edit the images and do the "computational" part with user input on a ... well, computer, rather than be limited by the camera manufacturer's built-in software for post-processing. The Zeiss ZX1 implements a lot of editing and sharing functionality in the camera and it has been vigorously trashed on photographers' gear forums online. I can't remember any product that got so much online hatred. These people enthusaistically don't want these features on their cameras. Personally I enjoy occasionally editing an image in-camera and sending it to friends via my mobile phone. It takes a couple of minutes to do it and people catch up with what I'm doing. I then later edit the image properly on a computer based on the RAW image(s). I also use automated focus stacking quite a lot. I'm not a big fan of combining multiple exposures in "HDR"-style effects as I find the automated algorithms don't do all that great result in terms of how I like the images to look and I prefer a more manual approach called exposure blending in most cases (with treelines I sometimes do use HDR or D-Lighting). I find the mobile phone cameras suitable for digitizing bills and hand-made drawings and for such tasks, but generally for photography I find the results disgusting.
Cameras don't use the same kind of OS as mobile phones as the mobile phones take a long time to start up and people want a camera to be ready to shoot within a split-second after turning it on, instead of taking 30 seconds to boot. Additionally, many experienced (still) photographers want to time action themselves rather than shooting all moments and then selecting afterwards. It's just a creation of habit from the film world, perhaps. A mobile phone OS isn't really suitable for real-time tasks where precise timing is important. Camera manufacturers sometimes make attemtps at Android-based cameras (Nikon and Zeiss have done that) and the resulting product gets universal trashing by the online photography community. A real-time OS is what the camera manufacturers use, and it's for good reasons.
The issue behind the camera sales time course is that the world now has hundreds of millions of digital ILCs and perhaps only one million is really needed. For these cameras to stop being functional it would take a long time. Which is why there is likely to be only a trickle of sales from now on. Younger generations have fallen behind on income and thus they don't have the purchasing power their parents had, and thus they don't buy expensive luxury items such as dedicated cameras, unless they work professionally in a field that requires it. Dedicated cameras are not needed in everyday life and the mobile phone camera provides the necessary everyday functionality. Artists and journalists are now largely endangered species and also don't have the jobs or purchasing power that existed in the past. People expect content to be free now so where is the compensation for the people who produce it? I don't have the numbers but my understanding of streaming services is that the compensation to the original artist is worse than it was when physical media distribution was required to disseminate the art, be it music, or photography fo that matter. News sites created by professionals still exist but they generate less money because much of the advertising money goes to google and facebook instead of the producer of the content like it used to be in traditional media (be it TV or newspaper). So everywhere the producer of the original content is stomped upon and it becomes more difficult to make a living in this way, and large international companies reap the profits, taking advantage of the content that they did not make. This, in my opinion, is one of the key problems of our time, and it is also contributing to the challenges facing camera manufacturers.

I don't think Nikon have any plans to leave the DSLR market any time soon; they are far more successful with DSLRs than with mirrorless and their mirrorless market share is quite small. They announced two new DSLRs this year (D780 and D6) and a DSLR lens (120-300/2.8). Also they in their public messaging have consistently stated that they will continue to develop both technologies taking advantage of each technology's advantages into the foreseeable future. I recall reading a comment from Nikon that at least in the next seven years this isn't likely to change (this suggests that they have products and technologies in development for products to be released in this period). Off course, what actually happens is also dependent on what the customers decide to buy, so it's not entirely up to Nikon's to decide since they need to sell products. Personally I am likely to buy a few more DSLRs in years to come. I could never really swallow the EVF. Nikon's plan is to design new products so that parts can be shared across DSLR and mirrorless products, and this way they costs of R&D and manufacturing can be shared, making it possible to maintain both product lines at lower cost. The D780 and Z6 seem to be the first example of this plan, with the Z6 sensor, LV AF technology and video technology inherited by the D780.

Here is an article showing that human cells die rather quickly in extended exposure to higher than 43 degrees Celsius:
 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4188373/
 
When human cells are at 44 C for a period of 1 hour, only about 10% of the cells survive (Fig. 1).
When using external recorder, Canon may have assumed that the camera is no longer hand-held but used on a tripod, since it would be pretty clumsy to hand-held the camera with recorder attached. Thus there is not as much likelihood of long-term exposure of the videographer's hands to the damaging heat when using an external recorder. And yet Canon have probably considered the needs of professional videographers here, and allowed external recorder to be used for that reason. A consumer is less likely to be informed about low-temperature burns and may be hand-holding the camera as a matter of course, whereas a professional may be using tripods and external recorders more frequently. It's a balance act between safety for the typical user and utility in a professional environment.
 

43 C is regarded as the limit of temperature that is safe for human tissue so that it's not damaged due to the heat. That's what is used in medical devices as the safety limit: during use, the device must not heat the tissue temperature above 43 C. If the temperature of the skin does rise above 43 C then you can expect some damage, though I don't know how quickly it happens or how severe it is. Roger writes "we ran it for 18 minutes before getting a temp warning. The hottest part of the camera was the back behind the LCD door (43°C / 109°F)". So it seems that the 43 C tissue damage threshold is indeed what Canon used to design their overheating algorithm to protect primarily against, and they're running it pretty close.  (Canon also mention controls for internal temperatures as a secondary consideration in the CineD interview).
 
Of course, if you don't hold the camera in your hands during recording and use a tripod or gimbal, then it wouldn't cause burns. But they seem to have designed the protection for those in mind who do their videos hand-held. My guess is that the 43 C could actually be written into some countries legislation or regulations as well, so Canon might not have any choice about it. I'll try to find some information on this.

43 C is regarded as the limit of temperature that is safe for human tissue so that it's not damaged due to the heat. That's what is used in medical devices as the safety limit: during use, the device must not heat the tissue temperature above 43 C. If the temperature of the skin does rise above 43 C then you can expect some damage, though I don't know how quickly it happens or how severe it is. Roger writes "we ran it for 18 minutes before getting a temp warning. The hottest part of the camera was the back behind the LCD door (43°C / 109°F)". So it seems that the 43 C tissue damage threshold is indeed what Canon used to design their overheating algorithm to protect primarily against, and they're running it pretty close.  (Canon also mention controls for internal temperatures as a secondary consideration in the CineD interview).
 
Of course, if you don't hold the camera in your hands during recording and use a tripod or gimbal, then it wouldn't cause burns. But they seem to have designed the protection for those in mind who do their videos hand-held. My guess is that the 43 C could actually be written into some countries legislation or regulations as well, so Canon might not have any choice about it. I'll try to find some information on this.