Hello and Welcome! If you have a technical question please check out our Forums. If you have an order or shipping question please refer to our Customer Support page. Please see all COVID-19 updates here and thank you for your continued support.


SparkFun will be closed on Tuesday, November 3rd because we are out voting! Orders placed after 2 pm MT Monday, November 2nd will ship on Wednesday, November 4th.


Member Since: March 29, 2011

Country: United States

  • I can understand the hard stance people in chip manufacturing industry take (I work for a large chip maker too), but there is a risk in taking such hard stance and drastic measures. While punishing the entitty (or entities) stealing the VID/PID and infringing the trademark, such steps primarily punish the consumers and value-add partners. Consumers are not in control of chip choice in this situation. Value-add partners do not have full control either due to complexities of supply chain.

    I am sure FTDI put serious thought into this and decided it is worthwhile action. Yet the consumers and value add partners are free to make their own decisions. It is conceivable that a number of value-add partners will decide it is too much of a risk to use products from a chip maker, who tries to protect their market share with such drastic measures. It is also conceivable that consumers will develop mistrust towards the brand - genuine or counterfeit there is not much difference to them.

    Long term these defensive measures can easily turn against FTDI because if consumers start avoiding products with FTDI-branded chips in them, value add partners will start turning to other solutions and the precious market share will collapse.

No public wish lists :(