4 ms·

If IEEE does that, some manufacturers will just ignore it. Sure they may have to write weasel words like "USB compatible but not USB authorized" on their produc

If IEEE does that, some manufacturers will just ignore it. Sure they may have to write weasel words like "USB compatible but not USB authorized" on their products, but they'll dominate the market by allowing people to use the largest variety of devices.

zdragnar 4y ago
The simplest practical way around that (imho) is to license the name for the 4.x standard and be proactive in taking action against anyone who uses the name or logo if their cables or ports aren't compliant. Of course, depending on the jurisdiction who can actually bring claims, and how damages can be calculated, vary greatly. I, for one, wouldn't buy "USB compatible but not USB authorized" cables if it meant being secure in knowing that the damned cable will actually work. Less tech savvy people might not, but there's also people who can be tricked into buying blinker fluid for their cars. There's gotta be a happy medium somewhere.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  > is to license the name for the 4.x standard Oh, while you are at it, they will also need names that don't keep changing and don't have synonyms. The 4.x names are ok for reference in a standard, but they are useless for consumer communication.
- solardev 4y ago
  Is that basically what Thunderbolt does?
- kayfox 4y ago
  > The simplest practical way around that (imho) is to license the name for the 4.x standard and be proactive in taking action against anyone who uses the name or logo if their cables or ports aren't compliant. USB-IF promulgates the spec, licenses the logo and all that, they also have a suite of tests that manufacturers are to perform and submit to certify the devices. The problem is that not all manufacturers perform the tests or use the logo, so while it means USB is ubiquitous, it also has some weird behaviors in some devices that are compounded by the complexity of the USB C spec.
- bluGill 4y ago
  They should trademark the connector, it was a unique design, so that can be done. Even now Congress (or your local county equivalent) could make USB the law and make anything non compliant illegal.

zdragnar 4y ago

The simplest practical way around that (imho) is to license the name for the 4.x standard and be proactive in taking action against anyone who uses the name or logo if their cables or ports aren't compliant. Of course, depending on the jurisdiction who can actually bring claims, and how damages can be calculated, vary greatly. I, for one, wouldn't buy "USB compatible but not USB authorized" cables if it meant being secure in knowing that the damned cable will actually work. Less tech savvy people might not, but there's also people who can be tricked into buying blinker fluid for their cars. There's gotta be a happy medium somewhere.

marcosdumay 4y ago
> is to license the name for the 4.x standard Oh, while you are at it, they will also need names that don't keep changing and don't have synonyms. The 4.x names are ok for reference in a standard, but they are useless for consumer communication.
solardev 4y ago
Is that basically what Thunderbolt does?
kayfox 4y ago
> The simplest practical way around that (imho) is to license the name for the 4.x standard and be proactive in taking action against anyone who uses the name or logo if their cables or ports aren't compliant. USB-IF promulgates the spec, licenses the logo and all that, they also have a suite of tests that manufacturers are to perform and submit to certify the devices. The problem is that not all manufacturers perform the tests or use the logo, so while it means USB is ubiquitous, it also has some weird behaviors in some devices that are compounded by the complexity of the USB C spec.
bluGill 4y ago
They should trademark the connector, it was a unique design, so that can be done. Even now Congress (or your local county equivalent) could make USB the law and make anything non compliant illegal.