Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Rohith_Kumar_Sp

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

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

 

true, not wanting to discuss, and/or leaving is not a sign of guilt. its a sign of frustration. business is not personal

 

 

The last thing most people want to do is maintain a business relationship with someone who is trying to ruin their business.

 

Remember when caselabs did this to thermaltake.  The resemblance of those cases was pretty good, however caselabs retracted and apologized to thermal take for the accusations because they realized they wouldn't win the case and they were open to defamation after that.  Same thing in this situation, If pitaka push this (especially in a court) they have to prove they designed the case (which they didn't, not enough to win a court case), which leaves them open to defamation.  I deeply suspect there is a reason pitaka didn't go through the legal system and instead used social media as a weapon.  In all of this,  a legal case would have done nothing more than highlight the fact UT bought a case from a generic manufacturer and made some unethical claims about it's origin and construction.  


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

You do realize that UT buying a generic case from china and claiming he designed it himself is not the same as Pitaka designing the thing and him copying pitakas design.  In fact the evidence we have suggest that Pitaka didn't even design it themselves, which suggest that Pitaka are just trying to stop UT from doing what they did.

 

If UT stole IP from Pitaka then Pitaka needs to take it to court, Not publicly defame someone to the point everyone just believes it.  

 

 

If he doesn't give Pitaka license to use his content then that is not a false claim for copyright strike,  he is well within all legal rights to disallow someone from using his content for their advertising.  Especially when said person is defaming him.  Advertising does not even come under fair use policy, there is just no argument to made here.

 

It's clear that after those allegations were made he didn't want to associate with them any more,  that does not indicate guilt, it is a natural and acceptable reaction and business decision.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

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". 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 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. 

They made it, I know they did because they said so.  That's not how evidence works.   Even in this thread people have posted pictures of that case from other manufacturers from years earlier?   It really isn't enough to stand up in court, let alone in this thread. 

Just now, OlympicAssEater said:

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

That's right, he did claim that.  That's false advertising, not IP infringement.   There is a very large difference between the two.

Just now, OlympicAssEater said:

Pitaka is using part of his video for comparison and criticize and spread the truth.

That's not allowed.  Not under fair use and not under copyright law.

 

Just now, OlympicAssEater said:

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". 

 

 

This truth you think exists is an assumption in your head.   Just because you think it's true doesn't make it true.  There is sufficient evidence to suggest neither of them designed the case, therefore neither of them have copied anyone.  Again no Legal action and no evidence of stolen IP. 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mr moose said:

true doesn't make it true

still though, pit can sue ut even if pit did not make the cell phone case.

thats the beauty of the american system, litigation for anything and everything no matter how trivial and nonsensical it is. damn nonsensical is really a word lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

still though, pit can sue ut even if pit did not make the cell phone case.

thats the beauty of the american system, litigation for anything and everything no matter how trivial and nonsensical it is. damn nonsensical is really a word lol

 

True, they can litigate, but so far with all we know they'll very likely lose opening themselves up for defamation with very little hope of winning. 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr moose said:

They made it, I know they did because they said so.  That's not how evidence works.   Even in this thread people have posted pictures of that case from other manufacturers from years earlier?   It really isn't enough to stand up in court, let alone in this thread. 

That's right, he did claim that.  That's false advertising, not IP infringement.   There is a very large difference between the two.

That's not allowed.  Not under fair use and not under copyright law.

 

This truth you think exists is an assumption in your head.   Just because you think it's true doesn't make it true.  There is sufficient evidence to suggest neither of them designed the case, therefore neither of them have copied anyone.  Again no Legal action and no evidence of stolen IP. 

I still wouldn't trust UT. I prefer Linus clickbait videos than UT clickbait videos. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, OlympicAssEater said:

I still wouldn't trust UT. I prefer Linus clickbait videos than UT clickbait videos. 

I couldn't agree more on this one.   I hate UT, I refuse to watch him because I find him arrogant.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 hour ago, mr moose said:

If he doesn't give Pitaka license to use his content then that is not a false claim for copyright strike,  he is well within all legal rights to disallow someone from using his content for their advertising.  Especially when said person is defaming him.  Advertising does not even come under fair use policy, there is just no argument to made here.

ok, can we agree that UT has tweeted so many times about Oneplus or Xioami using his video for their ad on youtube and has talked about and sometimes his own video was being used as a ad placement, sometimes snippets of his video uploaded by the companies etc,  i can't look the tweets up or the video where he has discussed this up because this was around 1/2 years ago, and even MKBHD has addressed this that his reviews are being used as ads. but eh catch is he's never done anything about it until now, that too only on pitaka's video not OP7's video or his Xiomi vids.  

so knowing fully well this is a thing and he knows it, what are the chances YT claimed Pitaka's video a day before the launch of his case video knowing he himself has removed his videos from the platform when nothing has been done all these days?. that has to be a manual claim, you can put two and two together.

now knowing this, apart from whether he copied the design or not, you can't say he didn't know that he copied pikata's case when he removed her review he's done a day before. ofcourse he knows people are gonna draw conclusions to his own video.

so fine, pikata doesn't have a case against him nor can't prove he copied them in court, but think of the optics here, the questions is not whether he was in the right according to law he made a case similar but not carbon copy so fine with the law, the question is how unethical or dishonest was he trying to swipe everything he's done leading upto the release of his case video. 

am i saying he shouldn't have bought case from aliexpress and sold them for higher margin? no, everyone's doing it, nothing wrong about people supporting YT'ers merch, but what i'm saying is;Right move, wrong execution, horrible optics. 
 


 

Spoiler
Spoiler

Intel i7 4790K (4.0 GHz) | MSI Z97-GAMING 5 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 2x8GB | Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC | Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB | Corsair RM 850W | Corsair H90 94.0 CFM | Logitech® Wireless Combo MK330 | Cooler Master HAF XM | Dell S2240L 60Hz 21.5 IPS | 

PCPartPicker 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, OlympicAssEater said:

I still wouldn't trust UT. I prefer Linus clickbait videos than UT clickbait videos. 

just dont watch any of linus videos and you will be far better off!

who cares about unbox therapy, a bunch of liars and thieves over there, and the arrogance and whomever else I can copy thats said/typed anything bad about unboxed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

ok, can we agree that UT has tweeted so many times about Oneplus or Xioami using his video for their ad on youtube and has talked about and sometimes his own video was being used as a ad placement, sometimes snippets of his video uploaded by the companies etc,  i can't look the tweets up or the video where he has discussed this up because this was around 1/2 years ago, and even MKBHD has addressed this that his reviews are being used as ads. but eh catch is he's never done anything about it until now, that too only on pitaka's video not OP7's video or his Xiomi vids.  

 

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.

 

6 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:


so knowing fully well this is a thing and he knows it, what are the chances YT claimed Pitaka's video a day before the launch of his case video knowing he himself has removed his videos from the platform when nothing has been done all these days?. that has to be a manual claim, you can put two and two together.

 


now knowing this, apart from whether he copied the design or not, you can't say he didn't know that he copied pikata's case when he removed her review he's done a day before. ofcourse he knows people are gonna draw conclusions to his own video.

so fine, pikata doesn't have a case against him nor can't prove he copied them in court, but think of the optics here, the questions is not whether he was in the right according to law he made a case similar but not carbon copy so fine with the law, the question is how unethical or dishonest was he trying to swipe everything he's done leading upto the release of his case video. 

am i saying he shouldn't have bought case from aliexpress and sold them for higher margin? no, everyone's doing it, nothing wrong about people supporting YT'ers merch, but what i'm saying is;Right move, wrong execution, horrible optics. 
 

 

The problem here is people are trying to claim guilt where there isn't anything to suggest guilt.  He took a case from aliexpress and put his name on. the worst thing he did was lie about the material and manufacture process (I'm pretty confident it's not handmade), which has nothing to do with pitaka beyond the fact they likely also got their case from aliexpress.     I know I can get generators from china that are made for Honda but have them rebranded with MR Moose on the side and sell them as unique products, this is not ripping of honda because they didn't design it, the company that designed it is selling to me legitimately.   If Pitaka, honda or any company want exclusive rights to sell a design then they need to design it themselves, otherwise it's not their IP.   And accusing others of stealing IP that was manufactured legitimately form the actual owner (if they even care) is unethical.  So where do we stop?    Without any other evidence all we have is one company being unethical and defaming another person because they decided to sell the same shit that they reviewed a while back.   If this is all there is to it then the only thing that will stop it is if they introduce a law that says you aren't allowed to sell products you reviewed before.  I can see lots of problems with that, a few solutions to unethical advertising I'll grant, but problems none the less.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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!

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
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. 


 

Spoiler
Spoiler

Intel i7 4790K (4.0 GHz) | MSI Z97-GAMING 5 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 2x8GB | Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC | Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB | Corsair RM 850W | Corsair H90 94.0 CFM | Logitech® Wireless Combo MK330 | Cooler Master HAF XM | Dell S2240L 60Hz 21.5 IPS | 

PCPartPicker 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


Life is like a bowl of chocolates: there are all these little crinkly paper cups everywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
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
 


image.png.fd57939eb8564661957c41e721b815dd.png

here's him hiding tweets 

EK0lcVeWkAA5fUH?format=jpg&name=large


 

Spoiler
Spoiler

Intel i7 4790K (4.0 GHz) | MSI Z97-GAMING 5 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 2x8GB | Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC | Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB | Corsair RM 850W | Corsair H90 94.0 CFM | Logitech® Wireless Combo MK330 | Cooler Master HAF XM | Dell S2240L 60Hz 21.5 IPS | 

PCPartPicker 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Sometimes I miss contractions like n't on the end of words like wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't.    Please don't be a dick,  make allowances when reading my posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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"


Judge the product by it's own merits, not by the Company that created it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×