[chbot] Heard about the FTDI caper?

Charles Manning cdhmanning at gmail.com
Mon Oct 27 03:27:51 GMT 2014 

I disagree.

You installed device that said it is an FTDI part (same VID). You thus
requested the use of the FTDI driver when you inserted it.

If the part dies then that is your fault.

BTW: It seems the part is not damaged, just disabled. That is a healthy
thing to do when the driver finds a  part that does not meet spec.




On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Mark Beckett <m.beckett at amuri.net> wrote:

> Charles
> While you are right that the copy is illegally using others tools, neither
> they nor MS have any right to interfere with the device.
>
> One analogy I saw was you take you car to the dealer, and they spot copied
> parts, and remove them, then hand back your car, rather than simply
> refusing to service your car.
>
> Regardless of the rights or wrongs of FTDI/MS, it has backfired on FTDI,
> and quite probably in the worst possible way.
>
>
> I think you need to also consider that its the end user who may have no
> idea of what is inside this item he/she brought, and has worked fine until
> now.
> By all means refuse to install a driver when you plug it in, but don't be
> altering the device.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> Charles Manning wrote:
>
>> I cannot see how either MS or FTDI are to blame or can be seen to be
>> illegal.
>>
>> That driver works fine with a legitimate product.
>>
>> Someone has chosen to build a product which pretends to be an FTDI chip,
>> but is not. They're not paying for all FTDI's software engineering etc (as
>> good or rubbish as they might be). They're just trying to mimic the FTDI to
>> encourage people to use software in a way that does not conform to the
>> licensing policy.
>>
>> USB.org issues VIDs specifically so that software can identify the
>> product it is working with. If you produce a product that hi-jacks some
>> elses VID and that driver does not work, or even breaks, your device then
>> it is YOUR fault.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Mark Beckett <m.beckett at amuri.net
>> <mailto:m.beckett at amuri.net>> wrote:
>>
>>     I've been getting emails from my overseas contacts for the few days.
>>
>>     This is some other info regarding what was a deliberate and
>>     possibly illegal move by FTDI.
>>     http://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/ftdi-driver-kills-
>> fake-ftdi-ft232/msg535270/#msg535270
>>
>>        I did find this one which shows the internals of both genuine and
>>        non-genuine which is interesting.
>>        http://zeptobars.ru/en/read/FTDI-FT232RL-real-vs-fake-supereal
>>                My view is FTDI have overstepped the mark by making
>>     them non
>>        functional, regardless of the copyright/you're using our driver.
>>        The end-user probably has no idea of what is inside the device they
>>        just brought.
>>            FTDI should have detected the device as not genuine and
>>     refused to
>>        load the driver for it.
>>        The customer would then have returned the product to the supplier,
>>        and the corrective action could then take place.
>>            This 'fix' has probably signed the end for FTDI, given that
>>     other
>>        products that are available, and that their product is not cheap to
>>        start with.
>>        MS are equally to blame since they have deployed a driver that
>>        knowing renders devices useless that were working and are not
>>     theirs
>>        to mess with.
>>        By changing the device, it no longer works on other OS's, which is
>>        well beyond their software agreements no matter how you read
>>     their EULA.
>>        Hopefully someone decides to sue them, maybe someone who already
>>        dislikes them and has big pockets ....
>>            In a twist of irony, it seems the FTDI software (FT_prog) will
>>        happily talk to the non-genuine device to write the VID/PID, and I
>>        have a copy of the older version if anyone gets trapped.
>>
>>     While Volker may think he's quite safe using Linux, the issue is
>>     if the device was connected to a windows box with the new drivers,
>>     it won't work on his linux box now, since the PID has been set to
>>     zero.
>>
>>     I have some sympathy for FTDI, but using Microsoft to deliberately
>>     reset the PID has gone too far, it should have simply refused to
>>     talk to the device.
>>     And if you read some of the various blogs, it was FTDI that pulled
>>     it, most likely because of the backlash/fallout that was coming.
>>
>>     It shouldn't affect any Arduino UNO or true clone as they use an
>>     Atmel 8U2 or 16U2 to interface to the USB.
>>     Since there are some who suggest not to use 'cheap chinese
>>     knock-offs' they won't have to worry either.... :-)
>>
>>     Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>     Mark Atherton wrote:
>>
>>         Another gem from Julian.
>>
>>         ... and there could be quite some fallout with the Arduino
>>         community.
>>
>>         I am still dwelling on the consequences of FTDI's actions.
>>
>>         -mark
>>
>>
>>
>>             Subject: Heard about the FTDI caper?
>>             To: Mark Atherton <markaren1 at xtra.co.nz
>>             <mailto:markaren1 at xtra.co.nz>>
>>
>>             <http://brainwagon.org/2014/10/24/ftdi-gate/?utm_source=
>> feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+
>> brainwagon+%28brainwagon%29
>>             <http://brainwagon.org/2014/10/24/ftdi-gate/?utm_source=
>> feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+
>> brainwagon+%28brainwagon%29>>http://brainwagon.org/2014/10/
>> 24/ftdi-gate/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+
>> brainwagon+%28brainwagon%29
>>             <http://brainwagon.org/2014/10/24/ftdi-gate/?utm_source=
>> feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+
>> brainwagon+%28brainwagon%29>
>>
>>
>>             Hi Mark
>>
>>             Just read about this...J
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Chchrobotics mailing list Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz
>>         <mailto:Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz>
>>         http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/chchrobotics
>>         Mail Archives: http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/chchrobotics/
>>         Web site: http://kiwibots.org
>>         Meetings 3rd Monday each month.
>>
>>         When replying, please edit your Subject line to reflect new
>>         content.
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Chchrobotics mailing list Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz
>>     <mailto:Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz>
>>     http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/chchrobotics
>>     Mail Archives: http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/chchrobotics/
>>     Web site: http://kiwibots.org
>>     Meetings 3rd Monday each month.
>>
>>     When replying, please edit your Subject line to reflect new content.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chchrobotics mailing list Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz
>> http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/chchrobotics
>> Mail Archives: http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/chchrobotics/
>> Web site: http://kiwibots.org
>> Meetings 3rd Monday each month.
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line to reflect new content.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chchrobotics mailing list Chchrobotics at lists.linuxnut.co.nz
> http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/chchrobotics
> Mail Archives: http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/chchrobotics/
> Web site: http://kiwibots.org
> Meetings 3rd Monday each month.
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line to reflect new content.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/chchrobotics/attachments/20141027/5cb3b817/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Chchrobotics mailing list