I finally took the time to RTFA and the situation is different than I understood.
Does the FTDI driver have any patented technology (I hate software patterns, but it matters a bit in this case)? And, why are the fake chips requesting FTDI's driver?
Patent issues aside, it sounds like the hardware is requesting a 3rd party driver, which the 3rd party owns and benefits from, even though they "give it away" for free. The fakes need to provide their own driver. Bootstrapping to a 3rd party proprietary driver is a situation where one should expect problems or failures, especially as the driver is updated (and regardless of how one receives it). Bricking is pushing it, just non-functional would suffice (bricking pure counterfeits is fine to me, but fakes that aren't promoted as the real thing is different - except they want the 3rd party driver).
If there are patents in the driver code then IP is being stolen.
In any case, the fakes should provide their own drivers. That is the crux of the issue.