Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally: Difference between revisions

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=~~[[Proven Industries]]~~ |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.

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.

==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" />

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" />

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>

Line 15:

===Claims===

#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.

#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]]}}</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 57:

==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}}</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>

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:

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.

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==

@@ 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=[[Proven Industries]] |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.
+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.
 ==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" />
+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" />
 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>
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ===Claims===
-#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.
+#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]]}}</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 57: / Line 57: @@
 ==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}}</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>
 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:
 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.
+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==