Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally: Difference between revisions

(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Needs the rebuttal included|Issue 2=Needs more "wiki voice" commentary on each claim}}

In 2025, Proven Industries, a lock company, is attempting to sue Trevor McNally,<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last= |date=May 1, 2025 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener}}</ref> a ~~lockpicking~~ expert on multiple social media platforms, for various questionable damages caused by the publishing of a currently delisted video demonstrating McNally picking the lock with a makeshift shim.

{{IncidentCargo

|Company=Proven Industries

|StartDate=2025

|EndDate=

|Status=

|ProductLine=

|Product=

|ArticleType=

|Type=Censorship, Legal Intimidation

|Description=

}}

In 2025, Proven Industries, a lock company, is attempting to sue Trevor McNally,<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last= |date=May 1, 2025 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250708171609/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |archive-date=8 Jul 2025}}</ref> a lock-picking expert on multiple social media platforms, for various questionable damages caused by the publishing of a currently delisted video demonstrating McNally picking the lock with a makeshift shim.

==Background==

In March 2025, Proven Industries published a video on Instagram, featuring their Latch Pin Lock<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Proven Industries > Latch Pin Lock |url=https://www.provenlocks.com/products/latch-pin-lock |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250211010616/https://www.provenlocks.com/products/latch-pin-lock |archive-date=2025-02-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Proven Industries}}</ref> and a Proven Industries staff member using a number of tools on the lock and stating that there was no way for anyone to bypass the lock. In the comments of that video a user by the name of gq_videos said "Let's introduce it to the @mcnallyoffical poke" someone at Proven Industries responded to that comment by posting: "lol those guys like the cheap locks lol because they are easy and fast".<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=DEFENDANT TREVOR MCNALLY’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.14.0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250611182806/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.14.0.pdf |archive-date=2025-06-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>

On April 2025, Trevor McNally published a response video on [[YouTube]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's YouTube video |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref> [[TikTok]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's TikTok post |url=https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |url-status=live |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[TikTok]]}}</ref> [[Facebook]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Facebook video |url=https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1ZicXjkyNb/ |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Facebook]]}}</ref> and [[Instagram]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Instagram post |url=https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Instagram]]}}</ref> intended to both educate and entertain users on the insecurity of the lock via the usage of a makeshift shim created out of a soda can. In response to McNally's video, Proven Industries submitted takedown requests of the videos on all of these platforms, and then soon after filed a lawsuit against McNally.<ref name=":0" /> As of October 2025, at least one of these videos are back online.

On April 2025, Trevor McNally published a response video on [[YouTube]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's YouTube video |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref> [[TikTok]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's TikTok post |url=https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |url-status=live |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[TikTok]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251018093705/https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |archive-date=18 Oct 2025}}</ref> [[Facebook]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Facebook video |url=https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1ZicXjkyNb/ |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Facebook]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260224122525/https://www.facebook.com/reel/666976299132793/?rdid=lhFozUjaS4G6taDu&share_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fshare%2Fr%2F1ZicXjkyNb%2F |archive-date=24 Feb 2026}}</ref> and [[Instagram]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Instagram post |url=https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Instagram]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250708171607/https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |archive-date=8 Jul 2025}}</ref> intended to both educate and entertain users on the insecurity of the lock via the usage of a makeshift shim created out of a soda can. In response to McNally's video, Proven Industries submitted takedown requests of the videos on all of these platforms, and then soon after filed a lawsuit against McNally.<ref name=":0" /> As of October 2025, at least one of these videos are back online.

Proven Industries posted a response video to McNally, called "Our Latch Pin Lock isn't going anywhere! Our customers know we make the BEST product on the market!" They did not name McNally, but the same staff member in their original video drank from a can of Liquid Death (the same drink McNally had used to create a lock shim).<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Our Latch Pin Lock isn't going anywhere! Our customers know we make the BEST product on the market! |url=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/16nZqtT-1sI |url-status=live |website=YouTube}}</ref>However, they changed their strategy in June and asked the judge in the legal case to issue an emergency injunction to ban Trevor McNally from making any content about Proven Industries while the court case was progressing.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG Document 10: PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250603165753/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |archive-date=2025-06-03 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>

[[File:McNally ~~Takedown~~.png|thumb|A screenshot taken from a taken down [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YjzlmKz_MM8 McNally video] displaying Proven Industries' copyright claim over the video]]

[[File:McNally video takedown by Proven Industries.png|thumb|A screenshot taken from a taken down [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YjzlmKz_MM8 McNally video] displaying Proven Industries' copyright claim over the video]]

==Lawsuit==

Line 13:

Line 27:

#Copyright infringement Cited multiple times inside of the legal document,<ref name=":0" /> Proven Industries attempts to claim that McNally was not following fair use doctrine for the purposes of his video. Notably due to the takedown of McNally's content, Proven instead uses screenshots to demonstrate theft, seen in sections 27 and 29 of the document.

#Defamation

#False advertising Proven Industries claims that McNally falsely advertised the ease in bypassing the lock in sections 32-35,<ref name=":0" /> and directly claimed that McNally was acting childish to support these claims. Additionally in sections 36-40, Proven claims that McNally was doctoring the footage, as the shim was shown deformed through the video, despite how aluminum is capable of being easily deformed under stress.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Runkle Of The Bailey |date=Jun 5, 2025 |title=When Your Lock Is Bad, Sue? Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><!-- Need to highlight sections 41 and 42:

#False advertising Proven Industries claims that McNally falsely advertised the ease in bypassing the lock in sections 32-35,<ref name=":0" /> and directly claimed that McNally was acting childish to support these claims. Additionally in sections 36-40, Proven claims that McNally was doctoring the footage, as the shim was shown deformed through the video, despite how aluminum is capable of being easily deformed under stress.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Runkle Of The Bailey |date=Jun 5, 2025 |title=When Your Lock Is Bad, Sue? Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref><!-- Need to highlight sections 41 and 42:

41. While the shim is briefly visible in the McNally Video, Defendant failed to disclose that successfully bypassing the lock required prior disassembly of the product to examine its internal components, including the position of the plunger, and to manufacture a custom-fit shim with precise notch dimensions.

Line 20:

Line 34:

#Violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”) This claim was made despite the defendant living in Virginia.

#Torturous interference

#Unjust enrichment Covered in section 4 in the introduction:<blockquote>On information and belief, McNally is affiliated with and/or an agent of Covert Instruments (hereinafter "Covert"), a company that sells lock-picking tools. McNally lists Covert's website on his social media pages, and Covert Instruments' website features McNally and benefits from the misleading content McNally produces.</blockquote>This claim has been cited as questionable by consumers<ref name=":1" /> and the media considering the fact that the shim was made from an ordinary object rather than any product sold on the website.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=May 23, 2025 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref>

#Unjust enrichment Covered in section 4 in the introduction:<blockquote>On information and belief, McNally is affiliated with and/or an agent of Covert Instruments (hereinafter "Covert"), a company that sells lock-picking tools. McNally lists Covert's website on his social media pages, and Covert Instruments' website features McNally and benefits from the misleading content McNally produces.</blockquote>This claim has been cited as questionable by consumers<ref name=":1" /> and the media considering the fact that the shim was made from an ordinary object rather than any product sold on the website.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=May 23, 2025 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref>

#Civil conspiracy

#Trade libel

Additionally, Proven attempted to file an emergency injunction against McNally<ref>{{Cite web |last=[[Proven Industries]] |date=Jun 2, 2025 |title=Preliminary Injunction |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener}}</ref> to prevent further posting about the flaws of their locks, called for within this injunction was emergency relief for damages that exclude engineering costs to resolve the lock's vulnerability, meaning if Proven Industries is to win this case, the company will neglect to resolve the flaws of the lock itself.

Additionally, Proven attempted to file an emergency injunction against McNally<ref>{{Cite web |last=[[Proven Industries]] |date=Jun 2, 2025 |title=Preliminary Injunction |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251018182224/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |archive-date=18 Oct 2025}}</ref> to prevent further posting about the flaws of their locks, called for within this injunction was emergency relief for damages that exclude engineering costs to resolve the lock's vulnerability, meaning if Proven Industries is to win this case, the company will neglect to resolve the flaws of the lock itself.

===Rebuttal===

#Trevor McNally's lawyers claimed that Section 107 of the Copyright Act<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-08-31 |title=107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use |url=https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250311190810/https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |archive-date=25-03-11 |access-date=25-08-31 |website=U.S. Copyright Office}}</ref> allows fair use of copyrighted material for "criticism, comment, news reporting, [or] teaching" and that the video that the take down request was made on was covered by protected use on all four factors of the section.<ref name=":3" />

#Trevor McNally's lawyers claimed that Section 107 of the Copyright Act<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use |url=https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250311190810/https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |archive-date=2025-03-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=U.S. Copyright Office}}</ref> allows fair use of copyrighted material for "criticism, comment, news reporting, [or] teaching" and that the video that the take down request was made on was covered by protected use on all four factors of the section.<ref name=":3" />

#His lawyers also claimed his video was transformative and that the portions he included were there to facilitate criticism.<ref name=":3" />

#The original Proven Industries was minimally creative and had already been published and McNally's reuse was minimal and integral to his criticism of the Latch Pin Lock.<ref name=":3" />

Line 48:

Line 62:

In the aftermath of the case another lock company, called PacLock launched a legal case against Proven Industry, claiming that Ronald Lee, II of Proven Industries had committed perjury, due to Proven Industries making heavy use of the term "made in the USA" in their advertising material and then Ronald Lee, II admitting in the McNally case that they import large numbers of lock cylinders from outside the USA.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-01 |title=Pacific Lock Company v. Proven Industries, Inc. (8:25-cv-01887) |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70841659/pacific-lock-company-v-proven-industries-inc/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250901010301/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70841659/pacific-lock-company-v-proven-industries-inc/ |archive-date=2025-09-01 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>

==Consumer response==

Coverage on these legal proceedings from media outlets appear to look down upon Proven Industries' attempts to sue McNally.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Toohey |first=Ellsworth |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=Lock manufacturer files lawsuit against social media lock picker |url=https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Boing Boing}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barnes |first=Erik |date=Jun 7, 2025 |title=Lockpicking YouTuber sued by the lock company he beat; his superb response rallied support |url=https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Good}}</ref>

Coverage on these legal proceedings from media outlets appear to look down upon Proven Industries' attempts to sue McNally.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Toohey |first=Ellsworth |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=Lock manufacturer files lawsuit against social media lock picker |url=https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Boing Boing |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251102134337/https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |archive-date=2 Nov 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barnes |first=Erik |date=Jun 7, 2025 |title=Lockpicking YouTuber sued by the lock company he beat; his superb response rallied support |url=https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Good |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260107112253/https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |archive-date=7 Jan 2026}}</ref>

From consumers, notably legal professional Runkle of the Bailey,<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Runkle of the Bailey |date=Jun 16, 2025 |title=Proven Takes An Early Loss In Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE}}</ref> call out the questionable nature of each claim within the legal document.<ref name=":0" /> From the subreddit r/LockPickingLawyer, many users back McNally's response towards Proven.<ref>{{Cite web |last=u/habichuelacondulce |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=To stop a YouTuber exposing the padlock security flaw with lawsuit |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref><!-- Want to cover, but no text transcript to read through:

From consumers, notably legal professional Runkle of the Bailey,<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Runkle of the Bailey |date=Jun 16, 2025 |title=Proven Takes An Early Loss In Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref> call out the questionable nature of each claim within the legal document.<ref name=":0" /> From the subreddit r/LockPickingLawyer, many users back McNally's response towards Proven.<ref>{{Cite web |last=u/habichuelacondulce |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=To stop a YouTuber exposing the padlock security flaw with lawsuit |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Reddit]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260224122651/https://old.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |archive-date=24 Feb 2026}}</ref><!-- Want to cover, but no text transcript to read through:

https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/lock-cousin/episodes/8---Locksport-Spotlight---McNally-vs-Proven-Industries-e33qm82 -->

Trevor McNally's personal response from the legal proceedings started with a short and hastily shot short clip to disprove most claims shown in the document by picking the lock mere seconds after obtaining the lock.<ref name=":2" /> This has continued into a series of clips demonstrating other locks sold by Proven Industries being bypassed by McNally.

==References==

[[Category:Proven Industries]]

[[Category:Lawsuits]]

[[Category:2025 incidents]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Incomplete|Issue 1=Needs the rebuttal included|Issue 2=Needs more "wiki voice" commentary on each claim}}
-In 2025, Proven Industries, a lock company, is attempting to sue Trevor McNally,<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last= |date=May 1, 2025 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener}}</ref><!-- We need to get this PDF uploaded to the wiki ASAP --> a lockpicking expert on multiple social media platforms, for various questionable damages caused by the publishing of a currently delisted video demonstrating McNally picking the lock with a makeshift shim.
+{{IncidentCargo
+|Company=Proven Industries
+|StartDate=2025
+|EndDate=
+|Status=
+|ProductLine=
+|Product=
+|ArticleType=
+|Type=Censorship, Legal Intimidation
+|Description=
+}}
+In 2025, Proven Industries, a lock company, is attempting to sue Trevor McNally,<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last= |date=May 1, 2025 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250708171609/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.1.0.pdf |archive-date=8 Jul 2025}}</ref><!-- We need to get this PDF uploaded to the wiki ASAP --> a lock-picking expert on multiple social media platforms, for various questionable damages caused by the publishing of a currently delisted video demonstrating McNally picking the lock with a makeshift shim.
 ==Background==
 In March 2025, Proven Industries published a video on Instagram, featuring their Latch Pin Lock<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Proven Industries > Latch Pin Lock |url=https://www.provenlocks.com/products/latch-pin-lock |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250211010616/https://www.provenlocks.com/products/latch-pin-lock |archive-date=2025-02-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Proven Industries}}</ref> and a Proven Industries staff member using a number of tools on the lock and stating that there was no way for anyone to bypass the lock. In the comments of that video a user by the name of gq_videos said "Let's introduce it to the @mcnallyoffical poke" someone at Proven Industries responded to that comment by posting: "lol those guys like the cheap locks lol because they are easy and fast".<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=DEFENDANT TREVOR MCNALLY’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.14.0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250611182806/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.14.0.pdf |archive-date=2025-06-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>
-On April 2025, Trevor McNally published a response video on [[YouTube]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's YouTube video |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref> [[TikTok]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's TikTok post |url=https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |url-status=live |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[TikTok]]}}</ref> [[Facebook]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Facebook video |url=https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1ZicXjkyNb/ |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Facebook]]}}</ref> and [[Instagram]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Instagram post |url=https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Instagram]]}}</ref> intended to both educate and entertain users on the insecurity of the lock via the usage of a makeshift shim created out of a soda can. In response to McNally's video, Proven Industries submitted takedown requests of the videos on all of these platforms, and then soon after filed a lawsuit against McNally.<ref name=":0" /> As of October 2025, at least one of these videos are back online.
+On April 2025, Trevor McNally published a response video on [[YouTube]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's YouTube video |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=YjzlmKz_MM8 |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref> [[TikTok]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's TikTok post |url=https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |url-status=live |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[TikTok]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251018093705/https://www.tiktok.com/@mcnallyofficial/video/7489223700735118622 |archive-date=18 Oct 2025}}</ref> [[Facebook]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Facebook video |url=https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1ZicXjkyNb/ |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Facebook]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260224122525/https://www.facebook.com/reel/666976299132793/?rdid=lhFozUjaS4G6taDu&share_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fshare%2Fr%2F1ZicXjkyNb%2F |archive-date=24 Feb 2026}}</ref> and [[Instagram]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=Apr 3, 2025 |title=McNally's Instagram post |url=https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |url-status=dead |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Instagram]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250708171607/https://www.instagram.com/p/DIAH9vps19y/?hl=en |archive-date=8 Jul 2025}}</ref> intended to both educate and entertain users on the insecurity of the lock via the usage of a makeshift shim created out of a soda can. In response to McNally's video, Proven Industries submitted takedown requests of the videos on all of these platforms, and then soon after filed a lawsuit against McNally.<ref name=":0" /> As of October 2025, at least one of these videos are back online.
 Proven Industries posted a response video to McNally, called "Our Latch Pin Lock isn't going anywhere! Our customers know we make the BEST product on the market!" They did not name McNally, but the same staff member in their original video drank from a can of Liquid Death (the same drink McNally had used to create a lock shim).<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Our Latch Pin Lock isn't going anywhere! Our customers know we make the BEST product on the market! |url=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/16nZqtT-1sI |url-status=live |website=YouTube}}</ref>However, they changed their strategy in June and asked the judge in the legal case to issue an emergency injunction to ban Trevor McNally from making any content about Proven Industries while the court case was progressing.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG Document 10: PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250603165753/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |archive-date=2025-06-03 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>
-[[File:McNally Takedown.png|thumb|A screenshot taken from a taken down [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YjzlmKz_MM8 McNally video] displaying Proven Industries' copyright claim over the video]]
+[[File:McNally video takedown by Proven Industries.png|thumb|A screenshot taken from a taken down [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YjzlmKz_MM8 McNally video] displaying Proven Industries' copyright claim over the video]]
 ==Lawsuit<!-- Extra documents to flip through: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ -->==
@@ Line 13: / Line 27: @@
 #Copyright infringement Cited multiple times inside of the legal document,<ref name=":0" /> Proven Industries attempts to claim that McNally was not following fair use doctrine for the purposes of his video. Notably due to the takedown of McNally's content, Proven instead uses screenshots to demonstrate theft, seen in sections 27 and 29 of the document.
 #Defamation
-#False advertising Proven Industries claims that McNally falsely advertised the ease in bypassing the lock in sections 32-35,<ref name=":0" /> and directly claimed that McNally was acting childish to support these claims.<!-- Try saying that with a straight face... --> Additionally in sections 36-40, Proven claims that McNally was doctoring the footage, as the shim was shown deformed through the video, despite how aluminum is capable of being easily deformed under stress.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Runkle Of The Bailey |date=Jun 5, 2025 |title=When Your Lock Is Bad, Sue? Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><!-- Need to highlight sections 41 and 42:
+#False advertising Proven Industries claims that McNally falsely advertised the ease in bypassing the lock in sections 32-35,<ref name=":0" /> and directly claimed that McNally was acting childish to support these claims.<!-- Try saying that with a straight face... --> Additionally in sections 36-40, Proven claims that McNally was doctoring the footage, as the shim was shown deformed through the video, despite how aluminum is capable of being easily deformed under stress.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Runkle Of The Bailey |date=Jun 5, 2025 |title=When Your Lock Is Bad, Sue? Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=ItSrtE-GHCc |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref><!-- Need to highlight sections 41 and 42:
 . While the shim is briefly visible in the McNally Video, Defendant failed to disclose that successfully bypassing the lock required prior disassembly of the product to examine its internal components, including the position of the plunger, and to manufacture a custom-fit shim with precise notch dimensions.
@@ Line 20: / Line 34: @@
 #Violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”) This claim was made despite the defendant living in Virginia.
 #Torturous interference
-#Unjust enrichment Covered in section 4 in the introduction:<blockquote>On information and belief, McNally is affiliated with and/or an agent of Covert Instruments (hereinafter "Covert"), a company that sells lock-picking tools. McNally lists Covert's website on his social media pages, and Covert Instruments' website features McNally and benefits from the misleading content McNally produces.</blockquote>This claim has been cited as questionable by consumers<ref name=":1" /> and the media considering the fact that the shim was made from an ordinary object rather than any product sold on the website.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=May 23, 2025 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref>
+#Unjust enrichment Covered in section 4 in the introduction:<blockquote>On information and belief, McNally is affiliated with and/or an agent of Covert Instruments (hereinafter "Covert"), a company that sells lock-picking tools. McNally lists Covert's website on his social media pages, and Covert Instruments' website features McNally and benefits from the misleading content McNally produces.</blockquote>This claim has been cited as questionable by consumers<ref name=":1" /> and the media considering the fact that the shim was made from an ordinary object rather than any product sold on the website.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=May 23, 2025 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[YouTube]] |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=MbQp5JcQwLA |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref>
 #Civil conspiracy
 #Trade libel
-Additionally, Proven attempted to file an emergency injunction against McNally<ref>{{Cite web |last=[[Proven Industries]] |date=Jun 2, 2025 |title=Preliminary Injunction |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener}}</ref> to prevent further posting about the flaws of their locks, called for within this injunction was emergency relief for damages that exclude engineering costs to resolve the lock's vulnerability, meaning if Proven Industries is to win this case, the company will neglect to resolve the flaws of the lock itself.
+Additionally, Proven attempted to file an emergency injunction against McNally<ref>{{Cite web |last=[[Proven Industries]] |date=Jun 2, 2025 |title=Preliminary Injunction |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=Court Listener |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251018182224/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/10/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ |archive-date=18 Oct 2025}}</ref> to prevent further posting about the flaws of their locks, called for within this injunction was emergency relief for damages that exclude engineering costs to resolve the lock's vulnerability, meaning if Proven Industries is to win this case, the company will neglect to resolve the flaws of the lock itself.
 ===Rebuttal<!-- Read documents from: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70036390/proven-industries-inc-v-trevor-mcnally/ -->===
-#Trevor McNally's lawyers claimed that Section 107 of the Copyright Act<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-08-31 |title=107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use |url=https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250311190810/https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |archive-date=25-03-11 |access-date=25-08-31 |website=U.S. Copyright Office}}</ref> allows fair use of copyrighted material for "criticism, comment, news reporting, [or] teaching" and that the video that the take down request was made on was covered by protected use on all four factors of the section.<ref name=":3" />
+#Trevor McNally's lawyers claimed that Section 107 of the Copyright Act<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-31 |title=107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use |url=https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250311190810/https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 |archive-date=2025-03-11 |access-date=2025-08-31 |website=U.S. Copyright Office}}</ref> allows fair use of copyrighted material for "criticism, comment, news reporting, [or] teaching" and that the video that the take down request was made on was covered by protected use on all four factors of the section.<ref name=":3" />
 #His lawyers also claimed his video was transformative and that the portions he included were there to facilitate criticism.<ref name=":3" />
 #The original Proven Industries was minimally creative and had already been published and McNally's reuse was minimal and integral to his criticism of the Latch Pin Lock.<ref name=":3" />
@@ Line 48: / Line 62: @@
 In the aftermath of the case another lock company, called PacLock launched a legal case against Proven Industry, claiming that Ronald Lee, II of Proven Industries had committed perjury, due to Proven Industries making heavy use of the term "made in the USA" in their advertising material and then Ronald Lee, II admitting in the McNally case that they import large numbers of lock cylinders from outside the USA.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-01 |title=Pacific Lock Company v. Proven Industries, Inc. (8:25-cv-01887) |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70841659/pacific-lock-company-v-proven-industries-inc/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250901010301/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70841659/pacific-lock-company-v-proven-industries-inc/ |archive-date=2025-09-01 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>
 ==Consumer response==
-Coverage on these legal proceedings from media outlets appear to look down upon Proven Industries' attempts to sue McNally.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Toohey |first=Ellsworth |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=Lock manufacturer files lawsuit against social media lock picker |url=https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Boing Boing}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barnes |first=Erik |date=Jun 7, 2025 |title=Lockpicking YouTuber sued by the lock company he beat; his superb response rallied support |url=https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Good}}</ref>
+Coverage on these legal proceedings from media outlets appear to look down upon Proven Industries' attempts to sue McNally.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Toohey |first=Ellsworth |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=Lock manufacturer files lawsuit against social media lock picker |url=https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Boing Boing |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251102134337/https://boingboing.net/2025/06/03/lock-manufacturer-files-lawsuit-against-social-media-lock-picker.html |archive-date=2 Nov 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barnes |first=Erik |date=Jun 7, 2025 |title=Lockpicking YouTuber sued by the lock company he beat; his superb response rallied support |url=https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |work=Good |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260107112253/https://www.good.is/youtuber-beats-lock-company |archive-date=7 Jan 2026}}</ref>
-From consumers, notably legal professional Runkle of the Bailey,<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Runkle of the Bailey |date=Jun 16, 2025 |title=Proven Takes An Early Loss In Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE}}</ref> call out the questionable nature of each claim within the legal document.<ref name=":0" /> From the subreddit r/LockPickingLawyer, many users back McNally's response towards Proven.<ref>{{Cite web |last=u/habichuelacondulce |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=To stop a YouTuber exposing the padlock security flaw with lawsuit |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref><!-- Want to cover, but no text transcript to read through:
+From consumers, notably legal professional Runkle of the Bailey,<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Runkle of the Bailey |date=Jun 16, 2025 |title=Proven Takes An Early Loss In Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE |archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE |archive-date=23 Feb 2026}}</ref> call out the questionable nature of each claim within the legal document.<ref name=":0" /> From the subreddit r/LockPickingLawyer, many users back McNally's response towards Proven.<ref>{{Cite web |last=u/habichuelacondulce |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=To stop a YouTuber exposing the padlock security flaw with lawsuit |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |access-date=Jun 18, 2025 |website=[[Reddit]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260224122651/https://old.reddit.com/r/LockPickingLawyer/comments/1l2o3tp/to_stop_a_youtuber_exposing_the_padlock_security/ |archive-date=24 Feb 2026}}</ref><!-- Want to cover, but no text transcript to read through:
 https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/lock-cousin/episodes/8---Locksport-Spotlight---McNally-vs-Proven-Industries-e33qm82 -->
 Trevor McNally's personal response from the legal proceedings started with a short and hastily shot short clip to disprove most claims shown in the document by picking the lock mere seconds after obtaining the lock.<ref name=":2" /> This has continued into a series of clips demonstrating other locks sold by Proven Industries being bypassed by McNally.
 ==References==
-{{reflist}}
+{{Reflist}}
 [[Category:Proven Industries]]
 [[Category:Lawsuits]]
+[[Category:2025 incidents]]