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

[amdorintel]

17 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I know I can get generators from china that are made for Honda

no need to buy online from China, just go to the local hazard fart aka Harbor Freight or Princess Auto in Canada.

They are honda clones!

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

no need to buy online from China, just go to the local hazard fart aka Harbor Freight or Princess Auto in Canada.

They are honda clones!

What I meant was that in context with getting a product from china and putting your own brand on it for the purpose of reselling.

 

On that note though, I just heard about auctions here in AUs where you can get the little 1000KVA geny's for $30 brand new.  Apparently there are shipping containers full of them where the business has gone broke or didn't pay the proper import duties.

 

 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

38 minutes ago, mr moose said:

He still has the right to decide who can use his videos for ads and who can't.    The fact he refuses to let pitaka use his video doesn't actually mean anything.  I certainly don't think that rejection is unfair given pitakas public accusations.

 

The problem here is people are trying to claim guilt where there isn't anything to suggest guilt. 

he has the rights to decide for sure, but the timing of it. i'm all about optics, why wait until all these days and strike them the day he releases his own video? it's not like pitaka's video was just upload a week ago, i'm less concerned about if he's in the right or wrong. and i can speak for myself, i'm not saying he's guilty of copying their product like others, i'm saying he knows the case he's done is so much similar with pikata that he has to remove their video first, copyright strike them and then go on a stream saying his is different when in the first video he had said "i can't find anything that's good so i made one myself" knowing fully he already has reviewed pikata's case and had given positive review.  

i'm not going for he's guilty here, i'm more for bad optics. that's just me. couple this with the iphone give away scandal which is an who other issue, you can see why i can't take what he says at face value. 

[Bombastinator]

There was a thread on the fourm here about this state Supreme Court case in Indiana.  It looked one way, then someone, @mr moose iirc found a video that said it was something else entirely and the facts of the case were different.  The court of public opinion sucks because of for no other reason the quality of available facts suck.

 

i got no clue what is actually going on.  If the court is involved though someone is going to find out.  I’m content with that.  I guess I have to be.

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

he has the rights to decide for sure, but the timing of it. i'm all about optics, why wait until all these days and strike them the day he releases his own video? it's not like pitaka's video was just upload a week ago, i'm less concerned about if he's in the right or wrong. and i can speak for myself, i'm not saying he's guilty of copying their product like others, i'm saying he knows the case he's done is so much similar with pikata that he has to remove their video first, copyright strike them and then go on a stream saying his is different when in the first video he had said "i can't find anything that's good so i made one myself" knowing fully he already has reviewed pikata's case and had given positive review.  

i'm not going for he's guilty here, i'm more for bad optics. that's just me. couple this with the iphone give away scandal which is an who other issue, you can see why i can't take what he says at face value. 

Wait a minute,  did he delete the videos before releasing his product or did he delete the video after pitaka's complaint?  That's a big point and we need ot be very specific about times.  I thought it was after the complaint, but if it happened before the complaint (and it would need to be before pitakas getting in contact with him not going public) then that changes a few things.  Not so much about thee copy claims, but about the intention, in which case we might actually agree more than not on this one.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

14 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Wait a minute,  did he delete the videos before releasing his product or did he delete the video after pitaka's complaint?  That's a big point and we need ot be very specific about times.  I thought it was after the complaint, but if it happened before the complaint (and it would need to be before pitakas getting in contact with him not going public) then that changes a few things.  Not so much about thee copy claims, but about the intention, in which case we might actually agree more than not on this one.

he deleted it a day before he released his own case video, that's proven. that was the reason i'm saying it's bad optics, even more so when he CC'd pitaka's video right before he released his later case. with how YT works i'm sure he first CC'd but it takes for while for things to get moving, so even thouh pitaka posted they got the strike hours after his video got released, i'm sure he did manual strike before the launch of his video. 

time coded
 

here's him hiding tweets 

[mr moose]

Let's hope it goes to court and all the evidence and time lines come out.    best way to know who's got the problems.

[Derangel]

4 hours ago, OlympicAssEater said:

Pitaka did design the case themselves even Pitaka CEO admitted. He showcase his case after review Pitaka case. COINCIDENCE? I think not. He also failed to copy two main parts of Pitaka case. 

 

He also claimed his case made with authentic kevlar fiber. Kevlar fiber is not a material. Kevlar fiber is a brand. Another false advertising. 

 

Pitaka is using part of his video for comparison and criticize and spread the truth. Pitaka did not use his video for ads for company $$$ marketing. They are using it to spread the truth amd UT wants to silence the truth. This man already lies twice therefore I cannot trust nothing from him and he is guilty thats why he turn back to Pitaka for "collaboration". 

 

 

No, Pitaka CLAIMED to have made it themselves. Despite this claim the case looks like any of dozens or hundreds of phone cases that have been on the market from Chinese sellers for years, possibly even before Pitaka's 2015 founding (according to their Linkedin page). Pitaka's website is so full of bullshit marketing speak that it really doesn't inspire confidence that they designed their cases anymore than Lew did.

 

Maybe its in the video, but I'm not seeing anywhere on the Latercase website that they claim the case is made from Kevlar fiber. Everything I'm seeing is saying aramid fibers, the same thing Pitaka says their case is made from.

[Taf the Ghost]

1 hour ago, Derangel said:

No, Pitaka CLAIMED to have made it themselves. Despite this claim the case looks like any of dozens or hundreds of phone cases that have been on the market from Chinese sellers for years, possibly even before Pitaka's 2015 founding (according to their Linkedin page). Pitaka's website is so full of bullshit marketing speak that it really doesn't inspire confidence that they designed their cases anymore than Lew did.

 

Maybe its in the video, but I'm not seeing anywhere on the Latercase website that they claim the case is made from Kevlar fiber. Everything I'm seeing is saying aramid fibers, the same thing Pitaka says their case is made from.

Seems like they removed the Kevlar bit, as that actually could get them in trouble. (Kevlar is a DuPont brand name.)

 

As for the discussion, Unbox Therapy made the utterly major mistake of "appearance of impropriety". The legality or liability of their actions don't truly matter. They lost the Optics before they started, because they acted, on the public layer, like they had something to hide in the direct run-up to the launch of the LaterCase.

[Derangel]

57 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Seems like they removed the Kevlar bit, as that actually could get them in trouble. (Kevlar is a DuPont brand name.)

 

As for the discussion, Unbox Therapy made the utterly major mistake of "appearance of impropriety". The legality or liability of their actions don't truly matter. They lost the Optics before they started, because they acted, on the public layer, like they had something to hide in the direct run-up to the launch of the LaterCase.

They've both acted shitty. Lew clearly expected people to say the case looked like the Pitaka one and tried to remove the video to hide it, which was a terrible move. On the other hand, Pitaka decided to use social media to attack instead of using proper legal channels. Pitaka's first step should have been to contact Lew or his lawyer to either get Lew to stop selling a case they claim to own the rights to or to work something else out, if that failed their next step should have been to file la lawsuit and put out a press release (written by legal consul) about the situation and explaining their side. Jumping to attacking on social media and causing this shitstorm makes Pitaka look as shady as Lew does.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Derangel said:

 Jumping to attacking on social media and causing this shitstorm makes Pitaka look as shady as Lew does.

And potentially opens them up to defamation trouble should they lose any future legal action. 

[Sauron]

So it's a phone case that looks like a phone case. It has to fit the phone so it's not like there can be much variance in the shape. The texture is just a typical faux carbon fiber finish. This is why copyright must die.

 

With that said, it seems UBT went out of their way to act in a shady fashion. If they had just acknowledged that the cases were similar due to unavoidable design decisions and hadn't deleted their review of a case from that brand it wouldn't have looked nearly as bad. This just makes it seem like they deliberately copied the design.

On 12/5/2019 at 11:23 AM, mr moose said:

I would also delete videos I made of a product if that company was out to shit on my products

But from what I understand the video was removed prior to the accusation being made public.

[Arika]

5 hours ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

-snip-
 

this is my biggest issue with it. It's not that it's essentially a pitaka case with slight variations, because that's what all cheap phone cases are. it's the fact he deleted his video of the pitaka case, ignoring the CR take down of the other video. It's clear he was trying to hide the fact that he already did a review on a product that he based his own product on. That is hugely dishonest and likely what caused this shit storm to begin with. If he released it like any other youtuber releases merch, people would go "eh it's a rebrand of a product that already exists, but is branded with my youtuber's name/logo, i'll buy it to support them"

[avg123]

So...has anybody here bought a LaterCase? 

[BuckGup]

I thought most knew he was full of shit by now. He claimed he was giving away a truck full of iPhones away when in reality he gave away maybe 4 and in the video it was just empty boxes

[JZStudios]

On 12/5/2019 at 9:04 PM, cpenchoen said:

They're both made of Aramid. 

I'm not going to read the rest of this thread, but it really looks like a standard ass phone case to me. Even if it's made of Aramid/Kevlar it's not like that's a hard material to get hold of. It's a stupid material to use though, it's really good against cuts and scratches, but then it turns into fuzz. Considering most people aren't grinding their phones against concrete it just doesn't need to be.

 

I'm not going either way on this and I don't care about Lew, but it really looks like a standard design with a readily available material.

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, Sauron said:

But from what I understand the video was removed prior to the accusation being made public.

Yes,  I understand that now.     I still think something is a miss though,  as a youtuber he knows he can't just pretend a video with that many views is going to be forgotten or that no one will realize he took it down.   I know he is arrogant, but I didn't think he was stupid too.

[amdorintel]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Yes,  I understand that now.     I still think something is a miss though,  as a youtuber he knows he can't just pretend a video with that many views is going to be forgotten or that no one will realize he took it down.   I know he is arrogant, but I didn't think he was stupid too.

liars will do some crazy stuff to cover their tracks!

isnt there a vault somewhere that saved the video?

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, amdorintel said:

liars will do some crazy stuff to cover their tracks!

isnt there a vault somewhere that saved the video?

probably, this is the internet, some nerd somewhere in the galaxy downloaded it to watch offline.

 

I don't think there is a problem with the existence of the video though (not from an incriminating point anyway), he just doesn't want to promote pitaka anymore.

[amdorintel]

Just now, mr moose said:

I don't think there is a problem with the existence of the video though

true enough but conspiracy theories happen over much less

[spartaman64]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

probably, this is the internet, some nerd somewhere in the galaxy downloaded it to watch offline.

 

I don't think there is a problem with the existence of the video though (not from an incriminating point anyway), he just doesn't want to promote pitaka anymore.

i think the bigger problem is that hes issuing dmcas to people critiquing him when its been established in the h3h3 court case that using clips of someone's video is fair use https://www.forbes.com/sites/fruzsinaeordogh/2017/08/25/h3h3-productions-scores-tentative-win-for-fair-use-online/#354ff9884d56

[mr moose]

15 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

i think the bigger problem is that hes issuing dmcas to people critiquing him when its been established in the h3h3 court case that using clips of someone's video is fair use https://www.forbes.com/sites/fruzsinaeordogh/2017/08/25/h3h3-productions-scores-tentative-win-for-fair-use-online/#354ff9884d56

I think the difference is that UT is preventing pitaka from using his video as an ad, which does not fall under fair use policy,  the hehe case is also different in that they were critiquing a fiction work (hoss's was deemed scripted  fictional), this is a factual piece that plays straight into defamation (also not covered by fair use).  So if pitaka want to upload a video where they use snippets of  UT's and critique the process, then they will have to convince a judge it was under fair use should it go to court.  If either of them don't want to take it to court then that is their problem.

 

20 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

true enough but conspiracy theories happen over much less

two thing I have to say to this,

 

1. conspiracies tend to happen over much less because people will deny their own existence to blame someone else for life being hard.

 

2. As much as 1. is true, my first thought in this whole case (if I am honest) was that the entire ordeal was setup between pitaka and UT to spur on dropping sales and get as much advertising out of the media and forums as they could.   I wouldn't put it past UT to engage in that.  The distinct lack of actual legal activity suggests either this or they both know they won't win on any of it.    Which leaves the rest of the internet debating a postulation or imagined ideal.  Which is not a bad thing, just largely pointless.

[spartaman64]

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I think the difference is that UT is preventing pitaka from using his video as an ad, which does not fall under fair use policy,  the hehe case is also different in that they were critiquing a fiction work (hoss's was deemed scripted  fictional), this is a factual piece that plays straight into defamation (also not covered by fair use).  So if pitaka want to upload a video where they use snippets of  UT's and critique the process, then they will have to convince a judge it was under fair use should it go to court.  If either of them don't want to take it to court then that is their problem.

 

two thing I have to say to this,

 

1. conspiracies tend to happen over much less because people will deny their own existence to blame someone else for life being hard.

 

2. As much as 1. is true, my first thought in this whole case (if I am honest) was that the entire ordeal was setup between pitaka and UT to spur on dropping sales and get as much advertising out of the media and forums as they could.   I wouldn't put it past UT to engage in that.  The distinct lack of actual legal activity suggests either this or they both know they won't win on any of it.    Which leaves the rest of the internet debating a postulation or imagined ideal.  Which is not a bad thing, just largely pointless.

no im talking about the videos of people saying that hes copying pitaka and hes taking those down

 

edit: nvm the article i was reading used a person's name instead of the company name and confused me 

[AnonymousGuy]

On 12/5/2019 at 3:23 AM, mr moose said:

 

All we need to know is are they actually copies of anything or is it just another case of everyone getting their shit from china so it looks the same and this pitaka company got their balls knitted up over this one?

I'll bet money it's China being China doing Chinese things.  There's 1 factory making cases or a bunch of factories all copying off each other.  Shit I can go on Amazon and search anything and find a dozen different "brands" with the same product. 

 

And...it's a fucking phone case.  There's only so many ways to skin that cat and even if it's identical I doubt you'd be able to legally win, since they're not the OEM's anyways it's some factory in china.

[Brehohn]

Those two cases are so exactly alike it's not even funny. Come on Unboxed..