No. The procedure is as follows:
1) The enduser claims damages to the person/shop/company where they bought the device.
2) Then, that person/shop/company replaces/fix/pay damages/whatever to compensate the enduser.
3) Then, that person/shop/company claims damages to their supplier where they bought the fake chips.
4) This repeats till reached at the culprit.
Don't you ever considered that the end user
does NOT deserve to go thru "the procedure" just because FTDI has a counterfeit issue?
FTDI anti-fake strategy was absolutely disgusting because they took the easiest and stupid way to act against fakes, punishing
unconscious end users.
And think that if the product isn't still in warranty, it is fucked. And IT'S-NOT-AN-END-USER-FAULT!
And when they realized that this was a terrible idea, they have done a step back on their decision,
so basically they have damaged the end-users only.My opinion is that hitting the end users for their problems is more or less like hit a child: is an asshole's behavior that doesn't deserve a crumb of respect.OK, so what happens when Intel release a processor that has a floating point math error ? ![Tweak :-/O](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/smiliey_cal.gif)
Well, for me that's a compliance issue, that in most cases is not intentional and doesn't let you with a dead device. Intel can (and must) effectively replace defective devices.