Louis Rossmann points out some facts LTT got wrong in DriveSavers video

[RollinLower]

1 hour ago, Vitamanic said:

That’s exactly why I think it’s problematic. You can’t know every detail, fact and historical aspect of a sponsor.

 

Therefore, why make a blanket claim that everything in those sponsored videos is something you stand behind and is accurate when you really (understandably) don’t have any way to verify all of it?

by that logic, they really couldn't do any sponsored content ever.

researching every company's extended history before agreeing to a sponsor deal is just not feasable.

[raf42]

Jessa's video on the subject: 

 

[asquirrel]

30 minutes ago, raf42 said:

Jessa's video on the subject: 

 

Well that's a bit of a wet fart. Her entire argument sums up as "seems bloody unlikely, and they have a history of taking credit for things they don't do." Not exactly the smoking gun I was thinking she had. Bummer. Still, it's not without value. If anyone can track down, unmask, and confirm even one (though more than one is probably not hard if you can do the one) of the stories about them not having certain capabilities in house, then it does make her far more believable than drivesavers. How many of us in IT have worked with master-level bullshitters who only know how to talk professional, but are clueless at actually solving problems? I've worked with a handful of those myself. Find one lie, and you frequently find a lot more. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

[The_russian]

10 minutes ago, asquirrel said:

Well that's a bit of a wet fart. Her entire argument sums up as "seems bloody unlikely, and they have a history of taking credit for things they don't do." Not exactly the smoking gun I was thinking she had. Bummer. Still, it's not without value.

What were you expecting to see? That's a legitimate question by the way. She can prove that she came up with the solution, but I don't see a way to prove that someone else didn't come up with the solution. Linus did mentioned a screenshot of a text that was supposedly sent from DriveSavers to Jessa 2 days before her stream. Quote from Linus during the WAN show, "I'm paraphrasing here, they say basically hey, this problem can be solved just so you know, and she says yep I know thanks." What's not clear is which solution they are talking about. If they were talking about removing the chip, then Jessa herself said that DriveSavers almost certainly already new about that before her steam. If they specifically said shorting the two pins, then that's different. 

[Mark Kaine]

21 minutes ago, The_russian said:

What were you expecting to see

Maybe that she'd answer Linus request for some evidence before making that video... 

 

She said (in this thread) she has some proof, and Linus said he would revise the content, so why even make this video, not a good look imo. Seems unnecessary. 

 

 

 

 

[Jessa Jones_iPad Rehab]

I sent Linus an email with some extra background details regarding our point of contention in the DriveSavers video.  
 

Linus suggested that I share with the community, so copy/paste.  Sorry for the length! 

 

Im curious to see how this story strikes your own personal credibility meter.

 

For the sake of our community, I would appreciate it if you posted the details you've provided to me on our forum as well. It'll give me an easy reference when we follow up on this week's live stream. I would post it myself, but I think it would be better coming from you directly.

 

Linus

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:26 PM Jessa Jones wrote:

Hey Linus,

I'm really impressed that you're following up on this.  What I can do is tell you our position with some industry insider details and provide some evidence.  If you feel that it is not compelling enough to take action---then I respect your decision.

Louis suggested that I should address this in a video, so here is my short, terribly edited video about our point of contention.  
https://youtu.be/hoJdNkYijmw  

With extra detail, here's why we think Drivesavers misrepresented our work as their own.   In specific, our contention is with the phrase "Drivesavers Figured Out...." and then the description of our Non-invasive speaker amp reset disable method for iPhone data recovery stuck on apple logo.

1.)Drivesavers does not do in house CPU rework.  They fly in a well known independent contractor, Federico (Rico) Cerva who does all their CPU swap work.   Rico lives in the UK and maintains his own independent data recovery business and is part of the microsoldering community.   It is common industry knowledge that Rico is the guy doing CPU swap for Drivesavers.   

 

2.) The iPad CPU.  See @federicocerva on Instagram to see Rico's work.  He posts Drivesavers cases on there and lets everyone know he took a trip to California to Drivesavers.   While he was in California, he posted a board that I've seen before.   It was an iPad from the NTSB that was involved in a fiery plane crash.  I know that Rico recovered it and posted it on his Instagram.  Memorable cases stand out.  iPad cases stand out.  CPU swap stands out.  And fiery plane crashes stand out.--that was a memorable case.  I suspect that the iPad CPU swap case you mentioned in your video is likely the same case that Rico recovered as an outside contractor for Drivesavers last January.  It's not technically a lie--Rico was paid by Drivesavers and did it in their lab.  But....it's a little bit fishy.  They had to go find a guy in another country to be able to do CPU swap, a technique they imply they are doing all the time in house.  It's a ploy to foster perceived expertise.

Evidence: You can scroll @federicocerva Rico's instagram and find him posting clear expertise in CPU swap, and then a trip to California, and a picture wearing a Drivesavers red shirt.  Then multiple CPU swap boards while at Drivesavers, then travel back to UK.    

This establishes that Drivesavers has an independent contractor that does their CPU work (at least for much of last year).  

3.) Screenshot from Rico and Raj Paul.
Raj Paul sent me the screenshot attached when I asked him for evidence of his claim back in December 2019 that Rico attempted to buy the BASIC METHOD (speaker amp chip REMOVAL) information from Raj.   In the screenshot, Rico is responding to a message group post where Raj Paul said "I can recover data from phones like that" meaning iPhones stuck on Apple logo after update to iOS13.  Prior to December 2019 this was considered unrecoverable software corruption by everyone except a handful of independents that each experimentally realized that the phone would boot with this chip REMOVED.

Notice in the screenshot that Rico says "for personal use only"   He means "I won't tell Drivesavers" which implies that at that time, Drivesavers had no solution (like everyone), and Rico knew that Raj Paul would not to sell his discovery for it to just get funneled to Drivesavers where they would then print $2000 bills.  This exchange is one week prior to the release of my December 2019 video.

Rico never paid Raj for the solution, because the community got into a tizzy about the foreign concept of  "pay for information" and the idea of removing speaker amp was shared for free.  Within days it was common knowledge, and the Apple hang after update was solved.

4.) Text to Mike Cobb.  I sent a text to Mike Cobb from Drivesavers to make sure that they immediately stopped telling customers that their data was gone if they hadn't already.   I assumed he had heard about it from Rico once it became non-proprietary content and common knowledge.   Mike replied "such a huge win for everybody out there"    He was referring to the BASIC METHOD, speaker amp REMOVAL.
His response was not "wait, you didn't know until now?  or "yes, we've been sitting on that one for months, guess that cat is out of the bag"   or "keep going Jessa, there's an even easier way"  His response is consistent with the fact that they too only became aware that these phones were recoverable at all just now along with everyone else.

Evidence:  (I think you already have a copy of this screen shot exchange based on your response video commentary)

5.) Development of my technique:  My NON-INVASIVE speaker amp RESET DISABLE method. 

Despite the fact that these phones were now recoverable for experienced people (like Drivesavers), I wanted to see if there was a way to make the procedure safer for beginner shops less well equipped.   I did not want an onslaught of "we tried to remove the speaker amp, and now the CPU is dead" cases.   I was simply curious to see if it could be done without actually removing the chip.  It sounded fun and like it would make a cool video if it worked because it meant the data recovery phones would also be fixed for long term use as well.  This was my motive to invest time into discovering my unique method.

By experimenting, I found that one line (of many), Speaker amp reset, could be grounded, and allow the phone to boot WITHOUT removing the chip at all.  Then the phone could be recovered, ground released, and the phone restored and it would be a phone again.   I published this UNIQUE NON-INVASIVE method that is completely different and independent of the BASIC REMOVAL method.  https://youtu.be/2OlY8pLfPs8?t=2591

In your video, you specifically feature MY NON-INVASIVE METHOD--grounding the speaker amp reset line, with the voiceover "Drivesavers figured out."   It makes sense to include this little trick in your video---because it is indeed cool. That's why I developed it.   It's creative and unique--exactly what WE are known for.   We don't deny that Drivesavers were aware of the earlier Speaker amp REMOVAL solution through Rico, but that's not what your video was about. 

When you asked them about this, they appear to be responding as if you asked them "How did you know about the speaker amp REMOVAL method, and not my specific technique which was shown.   
   
It is theoretically possible that Drivesavers could have SIMULTANEOUSLY pursued the idea behind my method.  But this is unlikely because:
6.)Time:  I published my non-invasive method ONE WEEK after they first became aware of the basic method.  
7.) They watched my video and saw it.    They don't deny that they watch my videos. Their current techniques (exact brand of thermal camera that I use for example) track and evolve over time with the methods I show on YouTube.  Anything you featured in your video I can find a corresponding video from my channel showing the exact same technique. 
8.) I had specifically called their attention to my channel by texting shortly before "hey you know this is solved"--referring to the basic removal solution 
9.) I have a history of telling them important breakthroughs and calling their attention to a video describing it so that they will learn and not tell people recoverable data is unrecoverable just because they don't know. No one deserves to lose their recoverable data.  See attached screenshot from 2018 about iPhone 7 baseband CPU.  They watched that video I made after I texted them in that case.  Therefore it is likely that they similarly watched my noninvasive method when it was first published.   (To be clear--this sharing has always been a one way street.  Never has Drivesavers ever given back, and they do not appear to have any unique techniques shown in your video--everything is standard stuff developed and shared by others.  They charge 10 TIMES, 1000% more than any other player in this field.) 
10.) No motive.  They knew about basic speaker amp removal from Rico, so they had a solution that worked perfectly fine to recover data.  They would have spent that week removing speaker amps and collecting $2000 bills.  They don't repair phones.  They don't make videos.  They would not have had a motive to simultaneously develop my same exact non-invasive method, pulling down the same exact line, in just the week between learning of the removal method and my video with the enhanced method.
11.) History of sneaky stuff regarding perceived expertise.  Example--they took in and evaluated a phone that only needed a screen replacement, and quoted $2000 implying it needed board repair.  Customer declined and sent it to us instead where we told them the truth.   Shown here: https://youtu.be/1EhoXWEhi8o
Example 2: Years ago, they negotiated with Cellebrite to resell passcode unlocking services on the condition that they do not advertise the service  (from personal conversation).   They made a press release implying that they developed this in house which was never true https://the-parallax.com/2018/12/06/drivesavers-unlock-iphone-android/   Cellebrite dropped them and since then, they've had "please stand by" on their website because they never had this kind of expertise. https://drivesaversdatarecovery.com/data-recovery-services/devices-supported/smartphones-and-tablets/passcode-lockout-data-recovery/

 

One last thing---I got cranky about this video in part because of the past.  Guess what happened on Mar 20 2018?  You uploaded a sponsored Drivesavers video showcasing their amazing expertise in iPhone data recovery.  That video has 3 million views.   I happened to be livestreaming a repair that day.  You guessed it---mine was a phone that came to me after Drivesavers was not able to recover it even on a $2000 quote.  It still had their sticker on the back.   I recovered it live on stream. 11k views.  https://youtu.be/kLbVlvLu8pY?t=2957

With that context, you can imagine how it felt to see this most recent video attribute to them a technique that I am 100% they learned from me.  "Drivesavers figured it out.....my ass."

Thanks for letting me rant.   If you need any extra details or support I'll see what I can do.   And now back to fixing phones!
Jessa

 

[raf42]

I have to head to bed, got an exam and a paper due tomorrow. But a quick glance over what Jessa wrote seems to be compelling (although there's reference to an attached photo that doesn't seem to be included, unsure if intentional or not).

 

But yeah, these seem to be specific, demonstrable situations where DS either fully lied, "technically didn't lie" or lied by omission.

 

Oh, and link to Rico in DS shirt Jan 2019, while visiting the US: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bs65xlXjRyl/

 

 

 

I humbly submit my crappy meme attempt:

 

[asquirrel]

10 hours ago, Jessa Jones_iPad Rehab said:

*snip*

Ok, this upgraded the proof from 'wet fart' to 'actually actionable'.

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129997194622407733

https://www.picuki.com/media/2130233384562920489

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129953118636297830

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129399129654083550

 

Picuki is a website to let you browse instagram without the popups / demands to sign in / etc. The above is a post from around a year ago he tagged as being at DriveSavers. Obviously nothing recent has been posted outside of the UK because, ya know, human malware cora-herpa-sphyal-AIDS. All of those links were the same trip to DriveSavers, it looks like.

 

I guess to me, the main difference is that now I know who to look for. The face isn't blurred, the name isn't random. I can validate the evidence Jessa submitted myself, and that helps build trust.

 

And these are another trip he made '1 year ago' but probably closer to 2 years ago? I can't get an exact date:

 

https://www.picuki.com/media/2060380165301477749

https://www.picuki.com/media/2059924975934800011

https://www.picuki.com/media/2060457413693962615

https://www.picuki.com/media/2061172047338095309

https://www.picuki.com/media/2059724695226275080

 

yea...ok. This guy 100% does their repairs. I was going to look for the ipad/NTSB/etc cases, but when you have this orgy of evidence...I really don't feel the need to validate the specific claims.

 

At the end of the day, does it 'prove' DriveSavers didn't co-develop the thing? No. But if the only thing you have to do, at a high level, is short a reset line to make the speaker IC disappear to the iphone, then that means there is more than one way to skin that cat. Why would they pick that particular reset line when 5 other options exist to do the same thing? Why not just short the power-in to the chip, with a resistor, to the ground plane on the far side; denying the chip power? There are indeed many ways to skin that cat, and there's no reason to believe they pulled a Newton/Liebniz co-development. Especially given that hey act more intelligent than they actually are (saying you can do CPU swaps, and then flying a guy in from the UK to do them for you, is saying you're smarter than you are; there is no possible way that they couldn't turn a profit with this guy as an actual employee, nor find someone else with the skills to do the CPU swaps.)

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by wkdpaul
Add screenshots, just in case the IG posts get deleted.

[WkdPaul]

@asquirrel

 

I edited your reply for readability, please keep in mind that a lot of visitors are on mobile, and quoting a long reply, to then also post a long reply makes it difficult to navigate.

 

Thanks

[raf42]

3 hours ago, asquirrel said:

Ok, this upgraded the proof from 'wet fart' to 'actually actionable'.

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129997194622407733

https://www.picuki.com/media/2130233384562920489

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129953118636297830

https://www.picuki.com/media/2129399129654083550

 

Picuki is a website to let you browse instagram without the popups / demands to sign in / etc. The above is a post from around a year ago he tagged as being at DriveSavers. Obviously nothing recent has been posted outside of the UK because, ya know, human malware cora-herpa-sphyal-AIDS. All of those links were the same trip to DriveSavers, it looks like.

 

I guess to me, the main difference is that now I know who to look for. The face isn't blurred, the name isn't random. I can validate the evidence Jessa submitted myself, and that helps build trust.

 

And these are another trip he made '1 year ago' but probably closer to 2 years ago? I can't get an exact date:

 

https://www.picuki.com/media/2060380165301477749

https://www.picuki.com/media/2059924975934800011

https://www.picuki.com/media/2060457413693962615

https://www.picuki.com/media/2061172047338095309

https://www.picuki.com/media/2059724695226275080

 

yea...ok. This guy 100% does their repairs. I was going to look for the ipad/NTSB/etc cases, but when you have this orgy of evidence...I really don't feel the need to validate the specific claims.

 

At the end of the day, does it 'prove' DriveSavers didn't co-develop the thing? No. But if the only thing you have to do, at a high level, is short a reset line to make the speaker IC disappear to the iphone, then that means there is more than one way to skin that cat. Why would they pick that particular reset line when 5 other options exist to do the same thing? Why not just short the power-in to the chip, with a resistor, to the ground plane on the far side; denying the chip power? There are indeed many ways to skin that cat, and there's no reason to believe they pulled a Newton/Liebniz co-development. Especially given that hey act more intelligent than they actually are (saying you can do CPU swaps, and then flying a guy in from the UK to do them for you, is saying you're smarter than you are; there is no possible way that they couldn't turn a profit with this guy as an actual employee, nor find someone else with the skills to do the CPU swaps.)

 

 

Small additional info, Rico has an affiliate link/thing with DriveSavers: https://drivesaversdatarecovery.com/welcome/federico-cerva-customers/

 

Doing some digging, they have similar "welcome" pages (see https://www.google.com/search?q=inurl:drivesaversdatarecovery.com/welcome&filter=0 for all of them) for affiliates from major manufacturers, as well as a few other repair companies (like ubreakifix). So he is 100% on their radar as a repair tech who they work with/affiliate with, and appears to be the only individual repair person to have a welcome/partner page.

(A weird note, unsure if it's relevant or not, but Rico's "welcome" page seems to be the *only* one that doesn't have a company logo/image at the top, just the generic DS background image, as well as one of only 2/3 that have a specific "DriveSavers Partner ID" to use when calling for a discount.

 

Edit: Also the 2nd batch of images was from June 2019, you can click the location tag on the instagram account (yes, I fully agree instagram is garbage as a platform), and see all posts tagged as being at DriveSavers: https://www.instagram.com/explore/locations/69867/drivesavers-data-recovery-and-digital-forensics/ you just have to scroll down a few pages, to see them (all thankfully with his watermark on them).

 

E2: one last thing, Rico has DriveSavers listed as an "interest" on his LinkedIn: 

 

Also regarding the "burnt ipad", possible image of it on DS's linkedin? https://www.linkedin.com/posts/drivesavers-data-recovery_datarecovery-drivesavers-wecansaveit-activity-6625812888256856064-j0AY

 

 

[Jessa Jones_iPad Rehab]

Yes—that’s the iPad fiery plane crash cpu job.  Here it is screenshot from Rico’s IG.  

[raf42]

21 minutes ago, Jessa Jones_iPad Rehab said:

Yes—that’s the iPad fiery plane crash cpu job.  Here it is screenshot from Rico’s IG.  

Ah gotcha. I had misinterpreted "last January", and was scrubbing back to Jan 2019.

 

For reference for anyone else, here's https://www.instagram.com/p/B7pMdFKDbDI/ and https://www.instagram.com/p/B7oVYnhl9d3/. Toasty board posted the same day by Rico and DS's Instas, both listing location as being at DS. (Screenshots just in case,  https://i.imgur.com/cjqtReF.png and https://i.imgur.com/PEDYMFJ.png) 

 

 

Damn yeah, if you look at the instagram posts that are "at" DriveSavers, I'd say 3/4 of the ones that are of actual boards (as opposed to smiling employees, etc) are posted by Rico, not DS themselves. Now that could be partially attributed to differences in social media approaches, but that does seem pretty damning.

[rcmaehl]

Hi WANSHOW users!

 

Please read the Community Standards before contributing and be good to each other.

[raf42]

Wanshow segment from today with timestamp: 

 

 

Edit: The tl;dr is that they found Jessa's evidence to be compelling, if not necessarily damning. While they're waiting for more evidence to decide (about their relationship w/ DriveSavers, my interpretation), they will be removing the segment in the DriveSavers sponsored video where the (alleged) appropriation took place, and adding in a text box that says something to the effect of "Jessa Jones from iPad Rehab says that this is her technique, further info down below", along with a link to Jessa's video on the subject.

 

Of course it's ultimately up to Jessa as to how she feels this outcome is, but to me as an outsider this seems like the best possible result given the current lack of finality in evidence, either fer or agin.

 

E: Looking back to the original video, it looks like Jessa's vid has been added in the description, but either the changes to the video itself haven't propogated, or they have but my weird viewing setup doesn't show them. Unsure which it is. It seems to show up in the "related videos" side panel, but doesn't pop automatically.

 

 

[Aasimar]

I'm really proud of how LMG is handling this.

 

Quote

The tl;dr is that they found Jessa's evidence to be compelling, if not necessarily damning. While they're waiting for more evidence to decide (about their relationship w/ DriveSavers

Linus said he is going to just not do any more videos with data recovery services, excluding drivespar due to how positive community feedback on them was.

He however has offered to do a collab with Jessa if she wants to, I think what he is saying there is as long as it isn't about this specific subject. I'd like to think that most of us here are on Jessa's side, her circumstancial evidence is compelling enough. It passes the "beyond a reasonable doubt" metric that court trials require. (a common myth is you can't be convicted on circumstantial evidence, that's incorrect; you can.)

I think Linus holding his standard before making definitive claims and backing one side against the other, that he needs to see direct evidence and confirmation, which is likely impossible.  But you can see in the way he's talking that he likely believes what Jessa is saying, there is just a few too many 'coincidences"

[LAwLz]

9 hours ago, raf42 said:

While they're waiting for more evidence to decide (about their relationship w/ DriveSavers, my interpretation), they will be removing the segment in the DriveSavers sponsored video where the (alleged) appropriation took place, and adding in a text box that says something to the effect of "Jessa Jones from iPad Rehab says that this is her technique, further info down below", along with a link to Jessa's video on the subject.

Isn't this also wrong since, according to Louise, Jessa didn't actually develop that technique herself but rather took it from some other people in the community? 

If that's the case then we are back to square one. Someone getting credit for discovering something they allegedly didn't discover themselves. 

[raf42]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Isn't this also wrong since, according to Louise, Jessa didn't actually develop that technique herself but rather took it from some other people in the community? 

If that's the case then we are back to square one. Someone getting credit for discovering something they allegedly didn't discover themselves. 

I believe what you're talking about is the distinction between figuring out the speaker IC bypass as a whole, and figuring out that you can do it non-invasively with tweezers. The general method of doing a speaker IC bypass was one that was found by the community as a whole, possibly originating with Rico, not sure exactly. But Jessa is pretty clear that she is the one who found the specific non-invasive, non-potentially destructive method using tweezers.

 

I had watched rossmann's video a little while back, but not in a couple of days. Does he specifically counter that claim about the non-invasive method? If so, back to square one. If not, then I think Jessa is in the clear.

[WkdPaul]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Isn't this also wrong since, according to Louise, Jessa didn't actually develop that technique herself but rather took it from some other people in the community? 

If that's the case then we are back to square one. Someone getting credit for discovering something they allegedly didn't discover themselves. 

As @raf42 said, she credited the person responsible for discovering the issue and the desoldering of the chip as a workaround, the workaround featured in the DriveSaver video was her own though.

 

It's important to not lose focus on the issue ; DriveSaver said the technique used in the sponsored video was theirs, even though it wasn't, and Jessa has herself credited the people who first discovered the workaround.

 

Maybe the amount of information or the timeline is hard to follow, but she did credited the people for their work.

[Guest]

Quote

It's not technically a lie--Rico was paid by Drivesavers and did it in their lab.  But....it's a little bit fishy.  They had to go find a guy in another country to be able to do CPU swap

THIS stood out like a sore thumb, California lacks people with the talent to do CPU swaps?! 

Things that make you go Hhmmm.

[Orange1]

On 10/9/2020 at 12:39 AM, TheNite said:

Came to say this, drivesavers has been really shitty about recovering data and it’s been WEL documented. I don’t know how Linus allow this to go up

Probably money, its very powerful.

[Mark Kaine]

On 10/17/2020 at 6:13 PM, ShrimpBrime said:

THIS stood out like a sore thumb, California lacks people with the talent to do CPU swaps?! 

Things that make you go Hhmmm.

Yeap I'm not judging that either way (not enough info) but flights cost money too, and he only comes over every couple of months, and is their *only* go to person for cpu swaps...? 

 

That doesn't really add up for me... I'm not saying it's true or not, but I feel we're missing a couple of info pieces here.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Yeap I'm not judging that either way (not enough info) but flights cost money too, and he only comes over every couple of months, and is their *only* go to person for cpu swaps...? 

 

That doesn't really add up for me... I'm not saying it's true or not, but I feel we're missing a couple of info pieces here.

Could be the go to guy. 

The backup guy might be local. lol.

He said that she said that he did it!!! 

Ask the blind man, he saw it too.

 

[GDRRiley]

so is the updated video ever going to replace the old one?

where are we at with this

[0bzdn]

New to the forums but long time fan of LTT (even before all the new sub-channels popped into existence), but just watched the latest LMG Clips video on this drama, watched Jessa's video, and read through this thread, and just my 2c (full disclosure: I work in legal including with IP, it doesn't give me any specialised knowledge about this but it does give me some guidelines):

 

1. I believe basically everything Jessa says, she has no reason to lie or obfuscate any facts, but I think it's important to separate things she has direct knowledge of, and things which she is assuming or inferring (effectively separating what'd be admissible testimony from conjecture or hearsay): she found out about the BASIC METHOD from/via the community including Rico, and passed on this information to Drivesavers, and that she came up with and posted a video of her ENHANCED METHOD which was the first time that method was in the public sphere. But as likely as it is that DS did learn the EM from Jessa's video, it's still an assumption (even if a reasonable one) and further that DS told LTT maliciously that they created the method because DS isn't one person and it's very possible that DS1 told DS2 something like "Let me show you how we recover data using the EM", and DS2 tells LTT something like "Yeah, this EM is how we worked out to recover data". Balance of probabilities? I believe Jessa that DS got EM from her and didn't discover it independently, but it's right now unproven.

 

2. There's a lot of commentary about DS' prices and to me, someone who works in a professional setting, that's wild. As a service provider, I charge based on results and expertise (including expertise I am able to source and arrange), not necessarily how much time I'm physically working on a job. And I absolutely use outside contractors, everything from specialised inspectors to interpreters to brokers, but my clients pay me to do this, and it's part of the services I provide and absolutely do charge for. So DS using Rico and 3rd party vendors and fixes, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that AND charging for that, because they're saving the client time and effort the client would otherwise have to spend exploring the independent phone/tablet repair world in order to even know how to solve their particular issue, not to mention there is value in DS contracting industry-leading specialists, knowing who to contact, and potentially arranging between separate 3rd party vendors or different steps in the data recovery process - all of that represents real value to the customer. Plus overheads - warranties, free diagnoses(?), providing recovery guarantees, etc. 

 

3. The whole drama seems to be a storm in a teacup, being a very esoteric discussion in a very niche field, revolving around community-specific values and ethics. There's no real legal (or honestly, even moral) right to ownership over a way to fix/do something unless it's truly novel, where it would rise to the level of being patentable. In my industry, precedent is hugely important, but it's NEVER attributed to any particular individual or company, it's just a precedent. On the other hand, I'd also never take credit for any particular tactic or strategy, whether or not I actually discovered it, because (in my field at least) as long as you know how to do something, that's what matters to the client. Who discovered or came up with or was the first to use a particular method never figures in conversation. This may just be me being too dismissive of the feelings and importance given to this by the independent repair community though.

 

Anyways, just my 2c.

[Orange1]

On 10/19/2020 at 8:14 PM, Mark Kaine said:

Yeap I'm not judging that either way (not enough info) but flights cost money too, and he only comes over every couple of months, and is their *only* go to person for cpu swaps...? 

 

That doesn't really add up for me... I'm not saying it's true or not, but I feel we're missing a couple of info pieces here.

 

Remember that drama sells.