12 ms·
Dbrand Is Suing Casetify
- drcongo 3y agoSomething went wrong, but don’t fret — let’s give it another shot. Twitter is going just great.
- vinniepukh 3y agothis happens to me 90% of the time i load twitter. i have to hard refresh the page for it to load.
- bernie_mann 3y agoTwitter loads on mobile maybe < 20% of the time. This must be the superapp we were all promised. Also, slightly relevant: Dbrand skins are excellent. Support.
- mardifoufs 3y agoThis has happened on twitter since at least 2017 afaik. I couldn't really ever load a tweet linked on say, Reddit, without it happening. I think it's intentional (to lock you out if you don't have an account I think) and not just an error. Refreshing usually works though.
- Veliladon 3y agoThey used the exact same strategy that map makers did with Phantom Settlements (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_settlement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_settlement).
- vertis 3y agoAlso Mountweazel[0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry
- photoGrant 3y agoGoogle, et al. Still do this!
- mike_d 3y agoI think all the cases people have found with Google Maps are issues with upstream data providers. There are much more subtle ways to catch theft that do not have a negative user experience (the angle an alley connects two roads, or the curve of a highway).
- vinniepukh 3y agowow, shocked at the blatant rip-off
- notRobot 3y agoThat is actually very damning evidence. You really do need brains to copy and get away with it.
- wongarsu 3y agoHad they understood what they were stealing instead of blindly copying every reference and injoke they might have gotten away with it
- wantlotsofcurry 3y agonitter: https://nitter.net/dbrand/status/1727721586856222893#m https://nitter.net/dbrand/status/1727721586856222893#m
- teddyh 3y agoNitter redirect browser add-on: <https://github.com/SimonBrazell/nitter-redirect https://github.com/SimonBrazell/nitter-redirect>
- kinduff 3y agoHere is a video from JerryRigEverything explaining the lawsuit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg
- simbolit 3y agoDbrand used trap streets :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
- richbell 3y agoTrap streets are at least traps — that is, difficult to identify as such. What possible reason is there to copy things like "1 1 1 1" or "RO8O7"? It seeks like Casetify ripped off Dbrand in the laziest way possible.
- cfiggers 3y agoCasetify almost definitely never looked at actual internals of actual smartphones, so there was no way for them to know the difference between faithfully replicated details and easter eggs.
- victorbjorklund 3y agoMaybe same effect but sounds like the purpose here was to include jokes for their customers (otherwise they probably would have included other things than jokes that can be identified by anyone with a brain)
- theyknowitsxmas 3y agoMicrosoft did this with the Xbox 360. Your serial number would enumerate on the rings under the X sphere on the dashboard to find NDA breakers.
- jamies 3y agoThe irony here is that Dbrand used to taunt Sony to sue them for making nearly identical, but black instead of white "fins" for the PlayStation 5. I believe they had to end up changing the design in their 2nd iteration...
- simbolit 3y agothey significantly changed the "darkplates". The 2.0 lawyer-approved version doesn't even have the distinctive "fins" (or collar or whatever you want to call it) .
- jrajav 3y agoIt would be unsurprising if that was all intended from the start as a viral marketing campaign. I don't remember hearing that they ever got in any trouble with Sony, and they're pretty infamous for "taunting" others to sue them (and similar stunt language like "our lawyers told us we couldn't make this") in all their marketing.
- jchw 3y agoWhile Dbrand definitely seems keen to pull some stunts, the difference between this versus that is that at least in that case, Dbrand still had to put in the work to replicate the PlayStation 5 faceplates. It's not as though Dbrand owns the inside of a phone: had Casetify done the work and simply created a similar product to Dbrand, this wouldn't be a lawsuit. It's because they stole the end product from Dbrand, which would be more like if Dbrand stole Sony's design files to make the faceplates. Whether what they were trying to pull with the PS5 was actually legal or not is another question, but also, in my opinion it certainly wasn't a dirty theft either way.
- theshrike79 3y agoThe dark plate 2.0 without the popped collar look is a lot cleaner in my opinion anyway.
- 0xbadc0de5 3y agoJerryRigEverything has a video about it that's worth a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg
- c2h5oh 3y agoCasetify page went dark for a while (HTTP 504) and just returned with landing page and all "Inside Out" products wiped clean from the page..
- Rapzid 3y agoSettlement incoming I bet.
- felipemesquita 3y agoReminds me of this “stolen from Apple” story: https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Stolen_From_Apple.txt https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&stor...
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoPhotos of a different version of the icon activated on the hardware https://macgui.com/news/article.php?t=514 https://macgui.com/news/article.php?t=514
- MR4D 3y agoOne question that nobody has asked yet - if Cassidy copied this, what else did they copy? I’m betting there’s more.
- whycome 3y agoThere's this other thing: Can apple/samsung/google claim a copyright to the case designs based on the design of its hardware? It really wouldn't be a stretch for Apple to say the specific layout of its macbook or whatever is a type of copyrightable design. Right? I mean, it reflects specific hardware layout design.
- tekeous 3y agoThis is unlikely to succeed, because a)it is an image of their product taken with their own camera - so if Apple wins here the precedent is you can’t take photos OF an iPhone?? Like hell that’s ever going to happen, and Apple would be idiots to do that anyway, seeing your friends in photos with iPhones in clear view is just free advertising and plays into Apples thing for “Apple users are elite”. And b)Apple’s copyright refers to hardware design. Dbrand didn’t make hardware - they made an image, or skin, or case. None of these are applicable competitors to Apple’s iPhone.
- marfil 3y agoHighly unlikely, Zach specifically mentioned how their scans are an artistic representation, since the scans undergo heavy editing to highlight certain parts and make the hardware "pop".
- ciabattabread 3y agoAnybody know which court this was filed in and the actual filing?
- MaryGab 3y ago[flagged]