I bet there are other ways of detecting them. I don't have any clones myself, so I can't test, but it's extremely unlikely that the cloners nailed everything else but this. And even if they did, it would still be way better to read-modify-write-restore the EEPROM as a detection mechanism, rather than, again, going for damage.
It was more a question. And something to think about.
I am not sure but it is very likely that the configuration data is only read once. Need to read the standard for that.
There's a difference between code that happens not to work on another device, and code whose sole purpose is to destroy another device. "Only use manufacturer-approved equipment" is not a valid legal veil to hide behind while you explicitly set out to destroy non-compliant equipment. It's (usually) legal to detect and refuse to work with knockoffs (not always - antitrust laws come into play here, and sometimes even that can be illegal). Deliberately causing damage is crossing the line.
I think this is more law stuff which you showed I do not know anything about.
Linux still won't load the driver. That's still causing deliberate damage, even if it's reversible.
Problem with linux that devices with ID zero cann't be used?
Hence, don't work. It's a negative state of affairs, particularly for the owners of said devices.
I personally think this method is bad practice, but I can image that they do it.
You seem to be confusing compatibility with 100% identical behavior. Intel and AMD CPUs are largely compatible. They're also trivial to tell apart. Even AMD's original (much simpler, compared to modern chips) Am486 was completely compatible with the 80486, but dedicated code designed to tell it apart could still do so.
You can buy Philips screwdrivers from two manufacturers. They are compatible. Doesn't mean they have to be the same color, material, or have all the atoms in exactly the same place. Just because I can look at them and tell them apart doesn't mean they aren't compatible.
Read again. License vs copy is going on in all this text. AMD has a license and for the philips screwdriver you needed a license blablabla.
If AMD vs INTEL is so easy why does not NVIDIA make x86 CPU. Something to thing about.
Actually, that product ID is unused by Intel right now, so absolutely nothing bad would happen, and if your device is of a standard device class, it'll even work fine with generic drivers. For example, I could build a PCI SD Host Controller interface with those IDs, and it would work fine. Intel might not be amused, and it would be a silly idea, but harmless. If Intel ever releases a device with that ID, then indeed it would cause a conflict. However, if I designed a device register-compatible with an Intel device and used its same ID, again, practically speaking, nothing bad would happen. In fact, that is exactly what all virtualization solutions like VMWare, VirtualBox, and QEMU do, all the time. I have myself written a virtual USB xHCI controller for QEMU, and yes, it could emulate one of two different chips, and yes, it used their VID/PID, and yes, it even had to deal with some retarded "anti-clone" vendor-specific commands, and no, it wasn't 100% bug-for-bug compatible, but it was close enough to work.
Sorry, I did not check this ID, but you get my drift.
Emulating some one else device in software is a bit different than sellling a cloned chip of it.
I tried to explain if you do not implement exactly the same register set then using some one else VID and PID maybe a mistake.
You pay $5000 for the right to use the USB logo. Yes, the IDs should be unique. No, there is no legal protection nor guarantee that they are, unless you use the USB logo. The world doesn't end if you use someone else's ID, especially if you do it in a compatible way.
No, there is no legal protection, but there is one organization for it.
No, the world doesn't end when you do this is your own hobby environment, but it will when you do in the real world. Modern PC work by a lot of standards which need to be implemented very carefully.
Actually, the vast majority of the USB devices that people use every day are identified by class codes, not VID/PID - mass storage, HID, CDC, even the PCI controllers (UHCI, OHCI, xHCI). VID/PID only have to be unique for a particular proprietary device interface. Nobody cares about what VID/PID you use for a standard device (as long as they don't conflict with a proprietary one, which might result in their driver being assigned), and again, there's nothing wrong with masquerading as another device if you intend to be compatible with it. You're taking a risk, but that's a compatibility risk, and it's not reasonable to expect direct gunfire from the other side in return.
Yes, I know see also another post from me good Google search though

Again you confuse an open standard Keyboard controllers mice, HD and so on.
They can use a standard drivers. But standard hardware still will have their own VID/PID,but use a generic driver. Specialized hardware uses a unique VID/PID pair.
Masquerading the chip and providing your own drivers is no problem.
Sure, and everyone demands a paper trail and armed guards across the entire chain of custody, to make sure no counterfeits slip in, right?
It sucks when these things happen, but placing all the blame on the final assembler/manufacturer is grossly oversimplifying things. You have no idea what happened that led to counterfeits being used in an end product.
Yes, very much. It also sucks when you get counterfeit money too. Live sucks.
Funny, the first Google result for "netherlands counterfeit goods" proves you wrong. There's an exception for personal use, within reasonable limits. Seriously, before you argue with someone on the Internet about your own country's laws, you might want to at least do a cursory check...
I am sorry, for you that you need to get personal.
By the way read it very careful it states that in principle it is FORBIDDEN.
But as everything in the Netherlands it will be "Gedoogd". I would advice you to google for this word.

None, but I've developed a rather strong disgust for people who destroy end-user hardware through gross negligence or deliberate action, over the past 8 years or so, due to certain communities I've been involved in, and I've done my best to make sure that my software never does that, not even in the least likely of circumstances. I have a very strong respect for people's hardware.
Yes, you have a very strong respect for some one else hardware, but none for their software, which I always find very strange. People pay without problems 1000 of euros for hardware, but do not want to pay for software.
I am always puzzled that all the world things that software comes for free. Most of the time it is, however one of the biggest challenges in a design to get the software correct.
So copying it is simple.