[HN Gopher] Dbrand Is Suing Casetify
___________________________________________________________________
Dbrand Is Suing Casetify
Author : kinduff
Score : 107 points
Date : 2023-11-23 16:15 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (twitter.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
| drcongo wrote:
| _Something went wrong, but don't fret -- let's give it another
| shot._
|
| Twitter is going just great.
| vinniepukh wrote:
| this happens to me 90% of the time i load twitter. i have to
| hard refresh the page for it to load.
| bernie_mann wrote:
| Twitter 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 wrote:
| This 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 wrote:
| They used the exact same strategy that map makers did with
| Phantom Settlements
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_settlement).
| vertis wrote:
| Also Mountweazel[0]
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_entry
| photoGrant wrote:
| Google, et al. Still do this!
| mike_d wrote:
| I 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 wrote:
| wow, shocked at the blatant rip-off
| notRobot wrote:
| That is actually very damning evidence. You really do need brains
| to copy and get away with it.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Had they understood what they were stealing instead of blindly
| copying every reference and injoke they might have gotten away
| with it
| wantlotsofcurry wrote:
| nitter: https://nitter.net/dbrand/status/1727721586856222893#m
| teddyh wrote:
| Nitter redirect browser add-on:
| <https://github.com/SimonBrazell/nitter-redirect>
| kinduff wrote:
| Here is a video from JerryRigEverything explaining the lawsuit
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg
| simbolit wrote:
| Dbrand used trap streets :)
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
| richbell wrote:
| Trap 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 wrote:
| Casetify 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 wrote:
| Maybe 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 wrote:
| Microsoft 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 wrote:
| The 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 wrote:
| they 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 wrote:
| It 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 wrote:
| While 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 wrote:
| The dark plate 2.0 without the popped collar look is a lot
| cleaner in my opinion anyway.
| 0xbadc0de5 wrote:
| JerryRigEverything has a video about it that's worth a watch:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byfWscC87Vg
| c2h5oh wrote:
| Casetify 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 wrote:
| Settlement incoming I bet.
| felipemesquita wrote:
| Reminds me of this "stolen from Apple" story:
| https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&stor...
| MR4D wrote:
| One question that nobody has asked yet - if Cassidy copied this,
| what else did they copy?
|
| I'm betting there's more.
| whycome wrote:
| There'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 wrote:
| This 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.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-23 23:02 UTC)