[deleted]
USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
11–20 of 100 posts
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#12I'm not sure I fully understand the article. What does the following mean?
"Since other USB device vendors such as Microchip and FTDI give away USB PIDs for free"
Does that actually mean, they give them for free? If so, how can they do that? Why does VTM allow them to do it? And what is the actual problem at all if you can get them for free?
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#13Why 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…
That cease and desist request ticks the boxes for "You are committing a thought crime and are not permitted to have these ideas".
Which explains why we (especially) react so strongly to it.
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
This idea did not sit well with VTM Group, the people serving as the
management, PR, legal, and membership and licensing department of the
USB Implementers Forum
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#15Why 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…
Let's just call it ThatThing2 and ThatThing3 in the hobby community :P
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#16I'm not sure I fully understand the article. What does the following mean? "Since other USB device vendors such as Microchip and FTDI give away USB PIDs for free" Does that actually mean, they give them for free? If so, how can they do that? Why does VTM allow them to do it? And what is the actual problem at all if you can get them for free?
A device has a Vendor ID (VID) and a Product ID (PID). For example, the following is output from lsusb:
Bus 002 Device 013: ID 0a12:0001 Cambridge Silicon Radio, Ltd Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)
0a12 is the VID for CSR, and 0001 is CSR's PID for "Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)." You can find a list at:
http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids
Microchip has paid USB Forum for its VID 04d8. If you build a USB peripheral with one of their microcontrollers, you can ask Microchip to allocate you a PID (since they have 64K of these), and let you use their VID:
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/APPLICATION%...
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#17Why 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…
As far as I remember, only the logo is trademarked, not the phrase USB. So you could still state your product has USB, you just can't display the logo anywhere.
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#18I'm not sure I fully understand the article. What does the following mean? "Since other USB device vendors such as Microchip and FTDI give away USB PIDs for free" Does that actually mean, they give them for free? If so, how can they do that? Why does VTM allow them to do it? And what is the actual problem at all if you can get them for free?
Since a USB device gets paired with a driver through a VID/PID pair, buying a single VID allows you access to 65536 PIDs for that VID. They give out the PIDs for free but hold on to the VID for themselves.
FTDI own a bunch of VIDs which are associated with "FTDI" devices. If you ask FTDI they'll reserve a small block of PIDs for you to use for your own products that use the FTDI USB chips. 8 PIDs cut out of a 65536 block is not a significant cost.
I'm surprised that VTM still allows them to do it though, maybe it's a special case because you're using their IC.
The problem is that VTM maintains an "official" list of VID/PID owners, so that they can keep drivers on seperate IDs and prevent clashes for users. Most hobbyists just pick a random VID/PID for their personal projects and hope for the best, but for small scale hobby releases it's problematic since "technically" they are going against the terms of service for the USB protocol. Sometimes there will be clashes if people pick random numbers, and VTM hates that.
http://www.ftdichip.com/Support/Knowledgebase/index.html?can...
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#19I'm not sure I fully understand the article. What does the following mean? "Since other USB device vendors such as Microchip and FTDI give away USB PIDs for free" Does that actually mean, they give them for free? If so, how can they do that? Why does VTM allow them to do it? And what is the actual problem at all if you can get them for free?
A device has a Vendor ID (VID) and a Product ID (PID). For example, the following is output from lsusb: Bus 002 Device 013: ID 0a12:0001 Cambridge Silicon Radio, Ltd Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode) 0a12 is the VID for CSR, and 0001 is CSR's PID for "Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)." You can find a list at: http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids Microchip has paid USB Forum for its VID 04d8. If you build a USB peripheral with one o…
Thanks a lot! What if more than 64K people have asked for a PID?
Re: USB Implementers Forum Says No to Open Source
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
A device has a Vendor ID (VID) and a Product ID (PID). For example, the following is output from lsusb: Bus 002 Device 013: ID 0a12:0001 Cambridge Silicon Radio, Ltd Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode) 0a12 is the VID for CSR, and 0001 is CSR's PID for "Bluetooth Dongle (HCI mode)." You can find a list at: http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids Microchip has paid USB Forum for its VID 04d8. If you build a USB peripheral with one o…
Thanks a lot! What if more than 64K people have asked for a PID?
They'd just buy up another VID, the names associated with VIDs don't need to be unique.