Hi!
Thank you for the warning - I know this might have some legal issues
attached, which I will look into before starting the implementation.
However I find it very unlikely that it would be illegal to implement
a protocol which is compatible with another. If that would be the
case, libftdi itself would be troubled too.
I don't intend to use the FTDI chips' VID/PID, and I don't intend to
sell these units for a profit either.
I am sorry if I offended anyone, I thought that a cheaper alternative
would be welcomed by all.
Regards,
Ákos Vandra
On 26 September 2011 10:15, Jason Hecker <jwhecker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> You do realize this may have some legal issues, right?
>
> There's that aspect but also, unlike the CH340 and blasted Prolific
> chips the FTDI ones *JUST WORK* and don't' randomly disconnect, go
> haywire or BSoD the computer and they have features like SPI and JTAG
> to boot. What else is around for a few $?
>
> --
> libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
> To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
