[Info-vax] FTDI driver for windows

[johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk]

On Wednesday, 19 June 2019 00:53:35 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:
> On 6/18/2019 12:39 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> > On 6/18/19 10:51 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
> >> On 6/18/2019 9:36 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> >>> John E. Malmberg <wb8tyw at qsl.net_work> wrote:
> >>>> On 6/18/2019 7:57 AM, VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> >>>> <snip>
> >>>>> The problem is in WEENDOZE.  The USB is an FTDI chip.  When I plug 
> >>>>> in the
> >>>>> altimeter, WEENDOZE proclaims a new device.  Then, WEENDOZE claims 
> >>>>> that
> >>>>> it's gone.  Then, it proclaims a new device.  Lather, rinse, 
> >>>>> repeat.  All
> >>>>> of this is before ever launching the software to download any data.
> >>>
> >>> This is the standard behaviour of a counterfeit FTDI device.  The 
> >>> windows
> >>> driver is written by FTDI and will deliberately shut down counterfeits.
> >>>
> >>> You may blame Windows for this, but it's doing exactly what it was 
> >>> designed
> >>> to do.
> >>
> >> This reminds me of the Intel compilers that would check the CPU, and 
> >> slow down when running on AMD CPUs.
> >>
> >> The end user won't know what components are used, and is an innocent 
> >> victim of such practices.  Personally, while I might understand, I 
> >> feel that it's a rather poor practice.  Vendors like that are to be 
> >> avoided.
> > 
> > Chinese "vendors" who steal intellectual property and then use it
> > to manufacture cheap knockoffs are to be avoided.
> 
> The key question here should be: is it legal for another manufacturer
> to produce a FTDI chip or not?
> 
> No => software rejecting it seems fair
> 
> Yes => software rejecting it seems problematic
> 
> Arne

Does the question "is it legal for another manufacturer to 
produce an FTDI chip" have a consistent answer regardless
of location?