What has this got to do with all things Mormon??????
C4FM is not proprietary to the un-named manufacturer or radios. It is an open standard that they hope to make the industry standard. It is just not adopted by anyone else......yet.
From the stuff I read about it, Yaesu is the ONLY company using it. They want to make it a standard, so have it as an open standard. No other company has "bit" yet, on using it too.
Whether or not promoting C4FM is morally wrong would depend upon two factors:
1) What is your relationship to the technology's only current manufacturer. If you are being paid to promote CFM by that entity, you should disclose your relationship with that manufacturer in any review you write. That will keep everything transparent.
2) Does the current manufacturer have a patent on this technology. While this is not a consideration as to whether you, as an independent outsider (assuming you are that), should perform the review, it is something that should be written in the review if it applys. If the current manufacturer of CFM technology has a patent on this technology (and it probably would if it developed the technology), then it should be noted in the review. Keep in mind that holding a patent is a way to limit others from entering the field with products at lower prices than the current manufacturer. This is because the current manufacturer, if it has a patent, can sue to block others from adding this technology to their radios for a specified period of time (in the U.S., I believe it's for 20 years).