frauenfelder at November 18th, 2013 20:42 — #1
tac at November 18th, 2013 20:52 — #2
They only needed to get the 'how dare you criticize us" fee from 13500ish people...
heartfruit at November 18th, 2013 20:56 — #3
I wonder if TRUSTe and the BBB have procedures they can take to get their logo removed. Presumely it is covered by copyright if nothing else.
eark_the_bunny at November 18th, 2013 21:02 — #4
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Here on the internet this is called the 'Streisand effect', sing out real loud there Barbra!
boundegar at November 18th, 2013 21:19 — #5
I have to wonder if the "klear" part is a gang sign to Scientologists?
jjsaul at November 18th, 2013 21:22 — #6
Trademark... that kind of certification is essentially a contract to license the trademark "seal of approval".
technogeekagain at November 18th, 2013 21:28 — #7
Logo would be covered by trademark, not copyright, but... yes, abusing it is actionable if the trademark holders want to pursue the matter.
As I said in the other thread, anyone who would write that nonsense into their sales contract is planning on having a significant number of disgruntled customers, which tells you all you need to know. This just confirms it.
BTW, aesthetic design of physical objects is yet a third category: "design patents" are the equivalent of copyright for that domain. If you see "Reg. US Pat. Off." (registered US patent office) rather than "patented", that's almost certainly a design patent rather than a technical one. My father liked to tell stories about the great inventor, Regus Patoff...
generalspecific at November 18th, 2013 21:34 — #8
I almost can't believe that they were so stupid as to not anticipate the negative fallout. This is what being an unethical toad gets you.
karls at November 18th, 2013 22:05 — #9
I am surprised that they are so big. I had never heard of them before and expected a much more amateurish operation overall.
fireshadow at November 18th, 2013 22:30 — #10
I was also surprised, especially since I love geeky toys (I usually go to http://www.thinkgeek.com/ and http://www.particlezoo.net/ ).
immutable_mike at November 19th, 2013 03:56 — #12
Exactly - for a company who's main (only?) sales channel is the interwebz, they are either deeply moronic about how customers use teh tubes, or there is something more methodical about their approach and their behaviour is explained by a dark cost-benefit analysis.
euansmith at November 19th, 2013 05:38 — #14
This seems very shortsighted on the part of Krapgear; sort of a Ratner's Moment, only premeditated. How can they expect this not to bite them in the bum?
itsumishi at November 19th, 2013 06:05 — #15
My guess is they've been ripping people off relatively under the radar for some time now. Unfortunately, a small amount of word of mouth started spreading and sinking their ability to do so, so they decided to try one last major rort (I'm guessing this wasn't the only lade to get the $3,500 fine) and then they disappear. Probably to pop up under a new name a while later...
coop at November 19th, 2013 10:11 — #20
Or maybe not so stupid. Just fishing for hits, perhaps...
@stoxxman's 'real name' is Ace Ventura, (uh, huh) and the post on the ranting blogspot page that wants you to donate to them was posted by 'Ace'.
Joined a few hours ago, and this is their only post.
shuck at November 19th, 2013 10:51 — #22
Since apparently the BBB has been trying to deal with the situation for about a year, and the bogus TRUSTe certification has been there at least that long as well, I'd say that whatever mechanisms they have for dealing with situations like this are completely ineffective.
shuck at November 19th, 2013 11:38 — #23
Also the CEO of the parent company, after being identified, seems to have taken down his Linked-In profile, which I find interesting. I'm wondering how much abuse he was getting there...
nixiebunny at November 19th, 2013 11:50 — #24
The BBB has now been crowdsourced.
kenatpopehat at November 19th, 2013 13:07 — #28
Why do I always get the most deranged arch-enemies?
s2redux at November 19th, 2013 13:07 — #29
Ace, is that you? Howdy! Since it appears to have slipped your mind, here's the context.
s2redux at November 19th, 2013 13:13 — #30
Because you're bald, Ken. D'uh!
next page →