Unbox Therapy accused of copying PITAKA phone case, copyright abuse & fake giveaways

[Anomnomnomaly]

16 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Can they really? I thought China didn't care about copyright laws.

But this is all just accusations to stir up drama, we don't know for sure if Unbox Therapy just bought cases from a supplier in China, or if they actually copied a design. If someone can sue for a similar looking case then dbrand should sue for everyone else for making vinyl device skins.

Vinyl skinning is not a concept invented by d-brand... they could only sue if the designs on the vinyl sheets were original art owned by them.

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, scuff gang said:

i wish it had a side view so i could see the buttons but i dont think theyres enough to sue

There’s always enough to sue.  There might not be enough to win though.  We’ll see what the courts say.

[amdorintel]

2 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

probably they just source from the same manufacturer on alibaba but its still a bit weird for him to claim that he made it. is that false advertisement?

its not weird, once the lie takes place the liar has to stick to their guns!

[Azims]

Comparison video posted yesterday:

 

 

[JAKEBAB]

What is with the obsession with that tacky fake carbon look? Argh, it's just so hideous! Also that phone case looks like any other so I don't know why he said " i don't like cases, so i made my own".....

[TetraSky]

As far as PITAKA CEO saying when did he ever contact them... Seriously? Why does that guy think he should know about everyone that ever contact his company? No one will disturb the CEO of a company for a God damn Youtuber wanting to collab or whatever, no matter how many subs they have.

[heIly]

2 hours ago, TetraSky said:

As far as PITAKA CEO saying when did he ever contact them... Seriously? Why does that guy think he should know about everyone that ever contact his company? No one will disturb the CEO of a company for a God damn Youtuber wanting to collab or whatever, no matter how many subs they have.

yeah it's not like they're a small company, where the ceo would actually be involved or anything, or that he can't apparently ask his team if that happened.

 

[RejZoR]

So much drama over phone cases that are made by 2 Chinese manufacturers and it doesn't even matter who "designed" it lmao.

 

Reminds me of quote from movie Armageddon...

 

"American components, Russian components, all made in Taiwan!"

[JustWantTech]

12 hours ago, -rascal- said:

Seems like both parties are just rebranding the same Fuyao factory phone case

 

You can only vary a phone case design so much...

Hey! my OnePlus 6T McLaren has the same "carbon fiberous" case, too...

 

 

Hmm... I guess the issue here is Lew hiding the fact that he copycat a product that has been copycated in china.... k....

[amdorintel]

4 hours ago, JAKEBAB said:

What is with the obsession with that tacky fake carbon look?

i dont blame the makers for making a buck

 

4 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Why does that guy think he should know about everyone that ever contact his company?

to keep the drama going, free publicity

 

 

39 minutes ago, JustWantTech said:

Hmm... I guess the issue here is Lew hiding the fact that he copycat a product that has been copycated in china.... k....

lol and liars have to keep their lie alive, its just what liars do, liars keep telling more lies to cover for the original lie

[TechyBen]

6 hours ago, Azims said:

Comparison video posted yesterday:

 

 

In before "they created drama just to get the views and buys". Lol.

[Gullerback]

i'm sure dozens or hundreds of companies make carbon fiber phone cases, I don't think there's much to stand on there. However as someone pointed out, It became an issue once people started deleting videos/dmcaing etc.

 

A few chinese companies are known to blatantly steal ideas then try and guilt/sue others even the original developer.

[Lathlaer]

Why are people so hung up on the CEO asking "when exactly did you contact us?"

 

To me this is the sort of question you ask to provoke and convey that you perfectly know that the answer is different than the other side is suggesting.

 

Maybe the CEO initially didn't know when they were contacted but after the shitstorm happened, it was easy enough to find out by, dunno, talking to the person handling the contacts? It's a non issue.

 

That question seemed more in line (tone-wise) with a wife catching her husband in a lie and responding with a "Okay, when did you say you met with Joe?".

[Bitter]

So are any other aramid Iphone cases being sued about? I found at least 3 on the first page of google results that look nearly identical to both the cases brought up in this..uh..case.

[Flying Sausages]

The problem is Unboxed Therapy abuse DMCA to take down Pitaka channel from uploading a video to show both cases and the truth.

 

I don't understand how can someone makes thousands of dollars on Youtube do something like this. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, OlympicAssEater said:

The problem is Unboxed Therapy abuse DMCA to take down Pitaka channel from uploading a video to show both cases and the truth.

 

I don't understand how can someone makes thousands of dollars on Youtube do something like this. 

I thought the copyright claim was just to prevent pitaka from showing the unboxed video of the pitaka review, not there own comparison video. I don't think we know if it was DMCA or just a youtube CR claim, They are different.

 

In which case it is not abuse of the system but legitimate use to prevent others from profiting from your content (timelines are important here, they would have been able to show it earlier but not after making allegations that defame UT, that changes everything).

 

 

 

To the thread in general,  it seems most of you have missed one really important detail,  whetehr the accusations are true or not, Pitaka have clearly succeeded in convincing many of you that UT stole something unfairly and is evil.  Fake give away's, claims of CR abuse and the whole kit and kaboodle.   regardless whether it stands up in a court or not, they have already won.  They know that the internet will keep bringing this up every time there is anything from UT moving forward.   In the days of the internet everything sticks except the truth. 

 

 

 

 

[Tieox]

Being Unboxed no doubt he will have a video out next month how he swapped to another case manufacturer for the new phone he swapped too.  And the same a month after that. 

 

The guy swaps his daily phone quicker than Linus can drop a $10,000 processor. 

[spartaman64]

3 hours ago, OlympicAssEater said:

The problem is Unboxed Therapy abuse DMCA to take down Pitaka channel from uploading a video to show both cases and the truth.

 

I don't understand how can someone makes thousands of dollars on Youtube do something like this. 

fastest way to kill your channel is to abuse the dmca system

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

I thought the copyright claim was just to prevent pitaka from showing the unboxed video of the pitaka review, not there own comparison video. I don't think we know if it was DMCA or just a youtube CR claim, They are different.

either way it falls under fair use ain't it? 

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

either way it falls under fair use ain't it? 

 

 

People can claim it is fair use and that is fine, however that doesn't trump a copyright claim unless it can be shown to meet the requirements of fair use in a court of law. 

 

In order for pitaka to use UT's video they would have to produce a video of their own that used snippets of UT's video with a dialogue that critics it or re create the video as a parody.    Without absolute evidence that UT actually did something wrong, then using his videos to make said allegations (which amounts to defamation and libel) is not covered by fair use policy.

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

 

People can claim it is fair use and that is fine, however that doesn't trump a copyright claim unless it can be shown to meet the requirements of fair use in a court of law. 

 

In order for pitaka to use UT's video they would have to produce a video of their own that used snippets of UT's video with a dialogue that critics it or re create the video as a parody.    Without absolute evidence that UT actually did something wrong, then using his videos to make said allegations (which amounts to defamation and libel) is not covered by fair use policy.

Defamation and libel have their own problems in court though.  Both are very hard to prove.  Not as bad as actionable slander, but close.  Generally defamation and libel are only used as deliberate money waster SLAPP suits. A “this will take two years and cost half a million dollars which I can spend and you can’t” kind of thing.  They’re almost unwinnable.

[mr moose]

Just now, Bombastinator said:

Defamation and libel have their own problems in court though.  Both are very hard to prove.  Not as bad as actionable slander, but close.  Generally defamation and libel are only used as deliberate money waster SLAPP suits. A “this will take two years and cost half a million dollars which I can spend and you can’t” kind of thing.  They’re almost unwinnable.

Plenty of people win libel and defamation cases.  Especially after public claims of illegal and anti consumer behavior where it hurts a business.

 

But in the post I was responding to,   claims that are defaming (claims that are not true ) would not be considered as fair use as that is neither a criticism nor review of the work but a direct attack on the creator of that work. .

 

 

 

 

[Yeroh]

Can't say I'm surprised. I've never understood why people follow this guy in the first place, he's the epitome of everything wrong with YouTube. Clickbait, horrible thumbnails, fake giveaways, overpriced merchandise, and probably worst of all, he's barely contributing anything valuable to the overall conversation about a product. The majority of his videos are simply cashing in on whatever controversy is going on at a given point.

[Shreyas1]

lmao look at this bs

 

 

 

[TheNamelessOne]

6 hours ago, Yeroh said:

Can't say I'm surprised. I've never understood why people follow this guy in the first place, he's the epitome of everything wrong with YouTube. Clickbait, horrible thumbnails, fake giveaways, overpriced merchandise, and probably worst of all, he's barely contributing anything valuable to the overall conversation about a product. The majority of his videos are simply cashing in on whatever controversy is going on at a given point.

I used to follow him, he was entertaining and funny at times, not informative, but funny, but over time I started to dislike him. He was just doing the same video over and over and that got boring fast. Plus his fake iPhones giveaway really made me dislike him.