In a way, the clones implement FTDI's USB protocol more *accurately* and correctly than FTDI's own chip, and this is what FTDI exploits.
-
-
Replying to @marcan42
@travisgoodspeed@marcan42 which indicates that the clones may not be infringing at all1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @whvholst
@whvholst@travisgoodspeed The only thing infringing about the clones is the FTDI logo stamped on them.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @marcan42
@marcan42@travisgoodspeed and how can the driver determine whether that is the case?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @whvholst
@whvholst@travisgoodspeed It can't. If the manufacturer is selling them sans logo, FTDI is now destroying legitimate non-counterfeit goods.1 reply 3 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @marcan42
@marcan42@whvholst@travisgoodspeed It does. Clone handles a specific op differently, & the driver checks for it: http://goo.gl/d4CCzn1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mtoecker
@mtoecker@whvholst@travisgoodspeed They can't tell a clone with the FTDI logo (counterfeit) from a clone without it (perfectly legal).2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @marcan42
@marcan42@whvholst@travisgoodspeed Welllll... I'm sure someone with USB exp. would say using VIDs and PIDs of another manuf. is wrong.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@mtoecker @whvholst @travisgoodspeed Sketchy maybe, but legal and under some circumstances desirable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.