Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hakku

M8 Upgrade programme ended?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry to insist, John, buy where did you see Leica promising that the M8 would be equal to the M9's specifications?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you prove that the statement to make a "futureproof" M8 (whatever that means) was the catalyst for you to buy the camera - and that you wouldn't have bought one if that statement hadn't been made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jimmy pro

 

Who said: 'Let us first kill the lawyers' ?

 

Probably every guy who ever got divorced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two points. I said that the release of an M9 without corresponding improvements in the M8 could trigger the suit. I didn't say that anyone said the M8 would be equal to the M9 nor did I say that Leica made such a statement.

 

Second, one does not need to prove that one made a purchase on reliance of a contract term or implied contract term. Statements in advertisements, brochures, web sites, press releases, etc. are all seen as terms designed to convince you to purchase their product and short of puffery are taken at face value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can you prove that the statement to make a "futureproof" M8 (whatever that means) was the catalyst for you to buy the camera - and that you wouldn't have bought one if that statement hadn't been made?

Just a matter to convince a couple of judges, Andy. Not that difficult if such a curious statement has been made IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Press releases and interviews along with a subpoena and deposition of Mr. Lee would all be used.

 

 

What subpoena and deposition? Made where? Since when do we have such such things in European courts? The American legal system is just that: American. Thank God!

 

All part of the American legal system. Of course they could always chose not to do business here and count on the EU business to keep them alive. Somehow, I think they would be gone by now if they had made that choice. So, if you want to play ball on someone else's lot you have to play be their rules.

 

P.S.

I don't agree with everything lawyers do and I am not a fan of class action law suits because they make the lawyers rich and give the plaintiffs next to nothing. I was just questioning Leica's reasoning in light of the legal vulnerabilities, nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...I didn't say that anyone said the M8 would be equal to the M9 nor did I say that Leica made such a statement...

OK John but why did you say 'be prepared when they offer an M9 and the M8 can't or won't be upgraded to equal the M9's specifications to face a class action and probably lose'?

As far as i'm aware Leica have never promised that so how could you win a class action on such a ground? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the solution is simple: keep the M8 in the catalogue ad infinitum, keep a few cameras on the shelf in case anybody ever wants to buy one and offer upgrades to that standard to all comers. Adding a new model can in no way be construed as influencing the older type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lct,

 

What I meant to imply was that the event of an M9 without some significant improvements being made available to an M8 would make someone mad enough to sue. I did not mean to imply that the basis of the suit would be that the M8 had to be the equal to the M9 in every way. Wouldn't you agree that if your camera did not perform as well as a newly released camera by the same manufacturer and they did not offer you any way to equal the performance you could not call that camera "future proof?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably every guy who ever got divorced.

 

Actually it was Shakespeare, Henry VI.

 

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"

Act IV, scene 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wouldn't you agree that if your camera did not perform as well as a newly released camera by the same manufacturer and they did not offer you any way to equal the performance you could not call that camera "future proof?"

 

I certainly wouldn't

 

I fail to see a reason behind this argument at all, to be frank. But then again, I don't live in a "class action suit" country. The whole idea is ridiculous, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In that case the solution is simple: keep the M8 in the catalogue ad infinitum, keep a few cameras on the shelf in case anybody ever wants to buy one and offer upgrades to that standard to all comers. Adding a new model can in no way be construed as influencing the older type.

 

First, it doesn't matter what you call the new camera. If it would make your M8 obsolete you can't call it "future proof." I realize English may not be your primary language; however, it isn't that complex to make the test as to whether a new camera by the same vendor has rendered the prior camera by that vendor obsolete or significantly less capable. A simpler solution for Leica would be to either a) allow a trade-up upgrade or

charge so much for the upgrade that no one would buy it (not likely to endear them to many customers).

 

Why is it that so many forum members feel they have to defend what is clearly a poorly thought out decision by Leica?

 

What does "future proof" mean to you?

 

a) Soon to be rendered obsolete.

Never to become obsolete and stay current with changes in technology.

c) Always to stay the same because it is the pinnacle of technology and no better technology will ever become available.

d) To incorporate a few enhancements, mostly cosmetic whenever the company decides to offer them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terms like "perpetual" and "future proof" would be construed under the plain meaning or reasonable person concept. Therefore, perpetual is most likely to be interpreted as forever and future proof as staying current with technology.

 

Perpetual:

1. Lasting forever, or for an indefinitely long time

2. Set up to be in effect or have tenure for an unlimited duration

3. Continuing uninterrupted

 

If Leica will keep offering forever the shutter update & screen update, they will be fine under the plain meaning & reasonable person concept.

 

Future proof:

Under above meaning, it means it will keep working in the future. Which it will. Your interpretation of "staying current with technology" makes no sense, sorry, unless further specified (as in, they should have promised upgrades including new sensor - new board - new something, which they didn't). Your interpretation of "staying current with technology" is so vague that your claim or a lawsuit based on this would hold no water - again, definitely not in the EU, but then again nobody in their mind would grant anything to anybody who got burned by hot coffee over here, and we wouldn't see warnings such as "Caution: the content is hot" on a coffee cup, which honestly makes me think all the time I am in the US that something is very wrong with your legal system there. A judge here would laugh at such a lawsuit where I come from - infact, they might grant something in the opposite case, if the coffe would be cold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Wouldn't you agree that if your camera did not perform as well as a newly released camera by the same manufacturer and they did not offer you any way to equal the performance you could not call that camera "future proof?"

Frankly no John. As Eoin wrote above, Leica promised only (AFAIK) that 'if any changes were made to the M8 during it's production life cycle these would be offered to maintain your older M8 in line with the current production model at that time'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I can sue the makers of my 30-year old Eterna coffeegrinder because their newer type grinds faster and they had the gall to call the thing "Eterna" ? Whoopy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First, it doesn't matter what you call the new camera. If it would make your M8 obsolete you can't call it "future proof." I realize English may not be your primary language; however, it isn't that complex to make the test as to whether a new camera by the same vendor has rendered the prior camera by that vendor obsolete or significantly less capable. A simpler solution for Leica would be to either a) allow a trade-up upgrade or charge so much for the upgrade that no one would buy it (not likely to endear them to many customers).

 

Why is it that so many forum members feel they have to defend what is clearly a poorly thought out decision by Leica?

 

What does "future proof" mean to you?

 

a) Soon to be rendered obsolete.

Never to become obsolete and stay current with changes in technology.

c) Always to stay the same because it is the pinnacle of technology and no better technology will ever become available.

d) To incorporate a few enhancements, mostly cosmetic whenever the company decides to offer them.

English is one of my four primary languages but Legalese is not. It seems to me to be utter bull, as a lot of posters called the camera obsolete when it came out....Your trade-up idea, btw, seems a most elegant solution. Cheap it probably would be not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lct,

 

What I meant to imply was that the event of an M9 without some significant improvements being made available to an M8 would make someone mad enough to sue. I did not mean to imply that the basis of the suit would be that the M8 had to be the equal to the M9 in every way. Wouldn't you agree that if your camera did not perform as well as a newly released camera by the same manufacturer and they did not offer you any way to equal the performance you could not call that camera "future proof?"

 

Huh? I seriously doubt there's 1000's of Nikon D200 users out there clamoring for Nikon to update their cameras to the specs of the D300. Or D2Xs users (whose cameras cost $5K the same as the new D3) seeking class action lawsuits.

 

The nature of digital is that it is constantly evolving. if you buy into shooting digital you have to buy into that concept. Otherwise, a film camera 50 years old can shoot the same film as a film camera 5 days old.

 

Digital has made things easier for photographers, but certainly not cheaper (imo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would also mean that when they bring out the R10 they would have to offer a "reflex Update"for the M8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and Leica has always referred to their cameras as "future proof investments" or some variation thereof. It's hyperbole and also the truth and doesn't even have to refer to an upgrade program to be true. The M8 is built and designed to last a lifetime (of course, this is debatable), much as the M3, M2, M6, M7 etc were/are. It's a timeless design - and timeless designs are generally future proof and therefore a good investment. Yeah, the M9 will be better but that doesn't mean on news of the release everyone's M8's suddenly stop working.

 

There's still lots of photographers out there shooting 4mp Nikon D2H's. I know, I just sold my D200 to one of them on Saturday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheap it probably would be not.

 

LOL, Jaap,

 

Surely you mean 'It would probably not be cheap'

 

On the other hand - quoting Shakespeare?

 

The British know that a large number of Nederlanders speak fluent French, German and English, and we are very jealous!

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy