The problem may be, cinema equipment is not consumer equipment, and so consumer laws that try to protect ordinary people may not apply here.
Qube and GDC are the only manufacturers with unusual short cert validity. A Doremi expiration is coming in late 2025, but that was instated back in 2006 or so, plus Dolby is working on a no/low cost cert extension option for those systems suffering expiration in 2025.
KDM Validity VS Signing Cert Validity error
-
Carsten
- Posts: 2804
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:11 pm
- Location: Germany
-
jamiegau
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:48 am
- Location: Australia
Re: KDM Validity VS Signing Cert Validity error
No,
In Australia it's consumer law, not domestic consumer law. Does not matter if you are a business. And it shouldn't.
You purchase a car, you expect it to run until it breaks (est. 10 years). You don't have to take it to get services every few years or the certificate used to start the engine expires and it no longer runs. That's in effect what they are doing. And if someone went them in an Australian court. they would lose. I expect it is like this in many parts of the world.
Don't make excuses for poor behaviour.
If GDC or others want short certificates for security reasons (and I expect there is a move to be more diligent here due to the China incident). They have to take on that cost. It's not the purchaser's responsibility so they should not be bearing the cost.
Other vendors, as example, don't.
James
In Australia it's consumer law, not domestic consumer law. Does not matter if you are a business. And it shouldn't.
You purchase a car, you expect it to run until it breaks (est. 10 years). You don't have to take it to get services every few years or the certificate used to start the engine expires and it no longer runs. That's in effect what they are doing. And if someone went them in an Australian court. they would lose. I expect it is like this in many parts of the world.
Don't make excuses for poor behaviour.
If GDC or others want short certificates for security reasons (and I expect there is a move to be more diligent here due to the China incident). They have to take on that cost. It's not the purchaser's responsibility so they should not be bearing the cost.
Other vendors, as example, don't.
James