FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
1–10 of 131 posts
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#2Good for them. I mean that.
If they want to redesign their driver so it fails to work with non-genuine FTDI chips, go for it. Nobody will judge them. Heck if they want to show a message that informs the user they're using a fake, that's fine too.
I think most people seemed to agree that bricking fakes was too far (and also could be considered illegal in some countries/areas). It also negatively impacted innocent parties (e.g. consumers who purchased generic goods, which happened to contain fake FTDI chips).
Plus if you're in the business of bricking things, it is too easy to make a mistake and brick your OWN stuff. I mean software bugs are common, and it is best to stay away from a set of them which indefinitely makes chips malfunction.
PS - I wonder if Microsoft got in touch and essentially told them "we will pull your driver from Windows Update unless you do it first. It won't return until it is fixed." We know from the previous thread that Microsoft was looking into this.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#3Good for them. I mean that. If they want to redesign their driver so it fails to work with non-genuine FTDI chips, go for it. Nobody will judge them. Heck if they want to show a message that informs the user they're using a fake, that's fine too. I think most people seemed to agree that bricking fakes was too far (and also could be considered illegal in some countries/areas). It also negatively impacted innocent part…
According to the update at the end of this ars technica article (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/10/window...) which indicates Microsoft involvement:
"Microsoft has given us a statement: Yesterday FTDI removed two driver versions from Windows Update. Our engineering team is engaging with FTDI to prevent these problems with their future driver updates via Windows Update."
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#4Good, destroying a device you legally purchased is unacceptable, whether you knew it was a counterfeit or not. It's not their job to police that kind of stuff.
Failing to work with counterfeit devices is completely fine and would have been a much better approach than straight up bricking them.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#5Good, destroying a device you legally purchased is unacceptable, whether you knew it was a counterfeit or not. It's not their job to police that kind of stuff. Failing to work with counterfeit devices is completely fine and would have been a much better approach than straight up bricking them.
And that's assuming it's actually counterfeit. Can you imagine the storm if "isCounterfeit()" turned out to be less than 100.000000% accurate?
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#6There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this.
I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#7There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this. I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice.
There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to the company for rapidly reversing course. They ate their crow; save the nuclear escalation for a company that refuses to.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#8There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this. I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
They have already damaged my equipment. I don't give two shits about hurting a corporation's feelings. They've already hurt my physical items. Once they've gone down that path, it's now an actionable tort. I can't believe their legal team approved of this.
They need to be made an example of.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#9There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this. I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
Maybe they should reach out to affected parties and help them replace their destroyed equipment.
Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
Maybe they should reach out to affected parties and help them replace their destroyed equipment.
They really should. Class actions are an inferior mechanism for both parties anyhow. The lawyers sitting in the middle will make it so it's radically more expensive for the company, and the odds of the supposed "winners" of the class action suit will probably get uselessly small vouchers for service rather than actual replacement.