Originally Posted by Agent 
He was accepting donations (which probably would not have covered the time it took if it was a paid job). However, it was not a pay to download service he was offering, just if you wanted to drop him a few quid, you could.
I'm unsure how legally acceptable it is to hide behind donations for services rather than demand payment. If there is even a hint of the donation being related to the service he's providing then he is getting renumeration I'd expect.
Keep in mind that some peoples cards are/were unusable without his modded drivers.
Then they are entitled to a refund from their retailer.
Are they though for previously sold cards, advertising that technology?
If you buy a card advertising X technology and Creative decide to take it away in an update, is this restriction fair / legal? After all, you have
paid for these features to work as advertised.
I suppose you could argue that you have not paid to use them under a different OS, however is a cards feature OS dependant? Would
really be pushing the boat out if they want to claim that one
Then again the best course of action is to take that to court or at least trading standards. If a product doesn't work as advertised then you are fully protected. What you should NOT do is take it into your own hands - the law exists for a reason.