Mike Puchol

Hey everyone, faking a USB ID is not illegal, you know?

I read with interest the many articles being written around the USB-IF’s decision to give its blessing to Apple’s use of the USB vendor ID, and claim that Palm’s usage of Apple’s Vendor ID in the Pre violates its policy. Now let’s sit back for a minute, and consider what the USB-IF actually is.

The Implementer’s Forum, as it is know, is made up from various companies that helped develop the USB standard and its newer, faster derivatives. The USB-IF acts as a central clearinghouse that provides USB vendor IDs to manufacturers who wish to use USB ports in their products. Every vendor using USB is supposed to register on this forum and pay its fees, which then gives them the right to use the USB logo on their products, and an individual vendor ID, which combined with a product ID, identifies every device on a USB bus.

In theory, this is sweet and dandy, but in the real world, shit happens. Anyone who has played with hardware peripherals long enough will have seen at least once a device identified by Windows as something else – this happens when a vendor “clones” another vendor’s ID. Some can get away with using the other vendor’s ID and a random product ID, combined with a customized driver on CD. In fact, there are tons of products shipping today which bear the USB logo without paying any duties to the USB-IF, and thus, running with “pirated” IDs.

The only power the USB-IF has is self-regulation. If you want to bear their logo, you need to pay their royalty, and agree to abide to its policies, including non-cloning of vendor IDs. So let’s say Palm gets booted off the USB-IF. They just need to remove the USB logo from their product (if they bear it at all – check your iPhone as an example), and they’re home free. They are free to use Apple’s vendor ID as much as they want, and there is no legal recourse Apple or the USB-IF has. With so much legal power, don’t you think Apple would have sued Palm already if there were grounds for legal action? Rather, they engaged in a technical cat-and-mouse game involving iTunes updates to kill off the attacker.

Personally, I think Palm is in delusion. Making the Pre compatible with iTunes will not make it any more popular that it already is not. And Apple has every right to place technical blocks on the Pre, particularly if they miss-represent the vendor ID. Still, if I was Apple, I would have just ignored the issue. The Pre is not a threat to the iPhone, which is far superior in all aspects (apart from the non-removable battery).