USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
hackaday.com
USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#2Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization.
(Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#3Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
I like this idea. If there's some benefactor to the Open Source community (or even if they pass along a collection) for the VID, that could even work. They just need to properly implement the standard and the VID can effectively be the Hoover or Kleenex of VIDs.
Edit: On second thought (after I actually read it), this bit...
Please immediately cease and desist raising funds to purchase a
unique USB VID for the purpose of transferring, reselling or
sublicensing PIDs and delete all references to the USB-IF, VIDs and
PIDs for transfer, resale or sublicense from your website and other
marketing materials.
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#4Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
They have:
"There are a number of ideas to get around VTM Group that include squatting on USB VID 0xF055"
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#5Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
The way these things normally work is that you're only allowed to use the name and marks if you're an official licensee.
So if you put the USB logo on your marketing and claim to have a "USB Mini" connector in your specifications then you could be in trouble on two fronts: (1) the usb folks can sue you for using their IP and (2) purchasers can claim the product is not "as described" which may given them certain rights dependent upon the location.
Not using the official logo shouldn't be a problem in hobby market. Everyone will recognise the connector. Not being allowed to identify it as USB2 or USB3 or whatever, that could be a problem. I'm sure there are creative ways around it though.
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#6Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
The way these things normally work is that you're only allowed to use the name and marks if you're an official licensee. So if you put the USB logo on your marketing and claim to have a "USB Mini" connector in your specifications then you could be in trouble on two fronts: (1) the usb folks can sue you for using their IP and (2) purchasers can claim the product is not "as described" which may given them certain right…
One should be able to say "Compatible with USB2", in the similar way 3rd party companies made cartridges for the Nintendo.
And about squatting on a VID.. Well, they should have thought about pollution of their namespace on their anti-hobbiest policies. They frankly deserve it.
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#7I don't understand.
I use lots of hobby stuff with USB ports. I have to lookup the vendor ID to make it read write in linux by default.
Presumably getting a proper ID makes this pain point go away from consumers somehow?
What's the gain I don't understand it?
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#8Just do what all the $1 Chinese USB devices on ebay do - clone an existing VID
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#9Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
[deleted]
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#10Why not just pick a VID and start using it? USB is so well understood at this point that there is no need for anyone to play ball with an "official" organization. (Whoever gets "officially" issued that VID is going to whine when they notice it's already being used for hobbyist purposes anyway, which means that the technique of just picking one will guarantee uniqueness.)
I like this idea. If there's some benefactor to the Open Source community (or even if they pass along a collection) for the VID, that could even work. They just need to properly implement the standard and the VID can effectively be the Hoover or Kleenex of VIDs. Edit: On second thought (after I actually read it), this bit... Please immediately cease and desist raising funds to purchase a unique USB VID for the purpos…
Read the article again. That's not the Forum, that's the VTM Group, which handles their marketing and legal concerns. The USB Implementers Forum itself didn't make a statement.