yea not really. the little brother sounds nasty..I know little kids don't really know about germs but sticking your hand in a toilet and flushing it over and over sounds disgusting. anyway OP, I'm gonna go with FYL even though the camera was obviously shit since it stopped working.

Well, it is said that the toilet is cleaner than... Nevermind, I forgot what the other thing is. But it does make sense. People always think toilets are so nasty, because of the urine and stuff, which leads to them cleaning it more often... It's not that bad, actually. Oh well, it's still nasty.

Now test your brother the same way to see if he's waterproof.

I agree but you should kinda thank him cause I'd like to find out that way instead of going like on a once in a life time scuba trip and screwing up the memory with a bad camera. so it's is a 1/2 FML. haha

22, yes. Exactly. 41, typically waterproof cameras aren't meant to be submerged in water like that. It just means they can have something spilled on them or things of that nature and still work. Or at least the ones I've seen are that way.

My waterproof camera is designed for taking pictures and videos underwater. And it works fine.

thanks for the correction. : D

You're thinking water resistant. Waterproof cameras can be submerged, but the waterproof seal can't handle the rushing water.

How would you feel if they returned you for not being waterproof?

#7 Wtf...

No. When you purchase something like that that they say is "waterproof", they mean if it falls (a very short distance) into a very shallow puddle and you take it out quickly, there SHOULD be no problems with it. Nothing of that nature is ever very waterproof on it's own. If you want it to be truly waterproof, you need one of those clear casings, that are actually made to be underwater. So if OP tries to claim that it wasn't waterproof and tells them what happened, they will laugh and hang up. Instead, you should strangle your brother, and say that you're testing his ability to breathe.

I have a water proof camera without a case and it can go ten feet under water

#30, well pin a rose on your nose.

Perhaps OP should try contacting them regardless of everything... wouldn't hurt =P

maybe the fine print says it's "water resistant"

@2 no, that camera is waterproof. The reason it broken is because the 6 yr old testing it in the toilet, the flushing put the camera in motion that bat around the toilet. The camera isn't shock proof, normal water resistant have a limit on how deep it can go. The deeper it is under water, the more pressure there will be on the camera. But this just my theory, maybe it was false advertising. Just my 2 cent. p.s if my theory are correct, manufacture will put warning: water resistant camera "warning, do not flush the camera" XD

that's usually marketed as water resistant but lots of cameras are suitable for underwater as well as even dust and freeze proof

It probably wasn't cheap, it just wasn't shock proof

the seal can handle pressure of still water, but can't handle something like rushing tide (or a toilet flushing) my underwater camera (a $479.00 camera) broke while i was trying to take tide shots.