Re: [Libusb-devel] USB VID/PID for open source projects

[Тихомиров В. <int...@ya...>]

25.03.2011, 20:20, "Peter Stuge" <pe...@st...>:
> Phi...@mi... wrote:
>
>>  Once a company or organization purchases a VID, they then "own"
>>  their PIDs and, short of selling them, can do what they will with
>>  them. Is this correct?
>
> This matches my understanding following my communication with USB-IF.

USB-IF agreement explicitly forbids selling of the PIDs your "own", that those who did that were deprived of their VIDs. Who told me that?

>>  Maybe we could have Xiaofan restate his original concern/problem
>>  about obtaining VID/PIDs.
>
> There are a few concerns, which are all legitimate:
>
> 1. The $2000 threshold of an own VID is high for amateur device
> developers, and it also seems a little wasteful to allocate one VID
> for what may be a single project.
>
> 2. Many USB chip vendors are happy to help smaller customers with a
> PID allocation from the chip vendor's pool. But often chip vendors
> (quite understandably) then require that the VID and PID will only be
> used in projects using the vendor's chips.
>
> Тихомиров Валентин wrote:
>
>>  The free PID trading would create the "messy gray market". So, you
>>  can do anything with your intellectual property only when you do it
>>  free of charge :)
>
> I wouldn't even call it intellectual property. It is a number
> assignment in a standardized context.
>
> My impression is very much that USB-IF would have no objections
> against an organization that manages PID assignments for projects
> which can not themselves climb the $2000 threshold, and raising that
> sum is not such a big deal if a bunch of people get together. But the
> devil is, as always, in the details; running the organization needs
> to be planned and criteria needs to be agreed upon, for it to be
> successful and worthwhile.
>
> I can completely understand that USB-IF do not want to *be* that
> organization. They have a different purpose.

If they favored making identifiers more accessible, they would not punish reselling. Revoking just creates the jumble (remember somebody in this thread even proposes to "hijack" the revoked VIDs, whereas, I believe, MSC Electronics struggles for bookkeeping its PIDs in order).

You asked me to stop ranting and do more thorough research. Your ranting about USB-IF opinions are interesting. But they are not consistent. They are as controversial, as USB-IF position is. Thus, I am right in my ranting.

Valentin

> //Peter