Proven Industries v. Trevor McNally: Difference between revisions

Line 8:

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>{{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>

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]]

Line 38:

#The defamation claims of Proven Industries would fail, as they were based on claims made against non-verbal acts, where Proven Industries didn't actually have any written statements to back up their claims that McNally was making false claims in his response video. (Essentially McNally never actually said Proven Industries was "dishonest or incompetent" and also never said their lock was "inherently untrustworthy.") McNally made a further video called "They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks" as a response to the claim that he had to disassemble the lock to create a bespoke shim and then reassemble it. In that video, he took a case of Liquid Death and opened an Amazon Locker and removed a boxed new Proven Industries Latch Pin Lock, drank the drink, cut up the can, created a shim and talked though how the shim process works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=2025-08-31 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MbQp5JcQwLA |website=YouTube}}</ref>

#Proven Industries's tortious interference claims were invalid.<ref name=":3" />

#Public interest always favours supporting First ~~Ammendment~~ rights.<ref name=":3" /><!-- Coverage in this video to eventually watch:

#Public interest always favours supporting First Amendment rights.<ref name=":3" /><!-- Coverage in this video to eventually watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE -->

===Outcome===

#Trevor McNally's lawyers objected to Proven Industries's request for an emergency injunction against Trevor McNally and the request for an emergency injunction was denied.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":3" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-01 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG Document 30: ORDER |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.30.0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250625231154/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.30.0.pdf |archive-date=2025-06-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>

#There were some blunders in the Proven Industries side of the legal case. These include:

##A witness said to be the Proven Industries lock expert not being able to explain to the judge if he was an employee of Proven Industries or another company and also admitting that he did learn how to shim the Latch Pin Lock after watching McNally's videos and practicing for a while. (This statement undermined the Proven Industries assertion that McNally had disassembled the lock and used trickery to make it appear that he had shimmed the lock. That assertion was the main thrust of their case against McNally.)

##When asked about their process for making sure their locks were not vulnerable, the answer from a Proven Industries witness was that nobody calling their customer services department had complained that one of their locks had been opened up by a shim attack. (The average consumer would probably not be able to recognise a lock that had been opened by a shim attack. This answer also made it appear like Proven Industries did not engage people with the sort of skills that Trevor McNally has to test their own products to destruction and may have done more damage to their own reputation than McNally's videos.)

##When asked, by the judge, about imported lock cylinders, a Proven Industries witness struggled to recall the details and had to estimate how many of their lock cylinders are imported from Europe and China.

#Proven Industries submitted witness statements and included personal information about their witnesses (including a witness who had expressed concern about being names) without asking for their documents to be submitted under seal. They later complained to the judge that their staff were being harassed and suggested this was somehow McNally's fault. And they made a request to the judge to retro-actively put all the documents in the court case under seal. McNally's lawyers objected to this, citing that Proven Industries had boasted on social media that they were going to use the court case to reveal McNally as a fraud and had therefore created public interest in the case, when they thought it would benefit them. Ian Runkle (a Canadian lawyer who had been creating YouTube videos about the case) also submitted an objection to all the documents in the legal case being sealed. Runkle's objection was stricken from the record by the judge.

#Proven Industries filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss their case without prejudice. The copyright strikes against Trevor McNally have been lifted.

The Latch Pin Lock with the vulnerability to shim attacks is still on sale and no product recall has yet been issued.

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==

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 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>{{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>
+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]]
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 #The defamation claims of Proven Industries would fail, as they were based on claims made against non-verbal acts, where Proven Industries didn't actually have any written statements to back up their claims that McNally was making false claims in his response video. (Essentially McNally never actually said Proven Industries was "dishonest or incompetent" and also never said their lock was "inherently untrustworthy.") McNally made a further video called "They called me out…now they’re suing me.  Proven Locks" as a response to the claim that he had to disassemble the lock to create a bespoke shim and then reassemble it. In that video, he took a case of Liquid Death and opened an Amazon Locker and removed a boxed new Proven Industries Latch Pin Lock, drank the drink, cut up the can, created a shim and talked though how the shim process works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNally |first=Trevor |date=2025-08-31 |title=They called me out…now they’re suing me. Proven Locks |url=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MbQp5JcQwLA |website=YouTube}}</ref>
 #Proven Industries's tortious interference claims were invalid.<ref name=":3" />
-#Public interest always favours supporting First Ammendment rights.<ref name=":3" /><!-- Coverage in this video to eventually watch:
+#Public interest always favours supporting First Amendment rights.<ref name=":3" /><!-- Coverage in this video to eventually watch:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH1rzaMTvRE -->
+===Outcome===
+#Trevor McNally's lawyers objected to Proven Industries's request for an emergency injunction against Trevor McNally and the request for an emergency injunction was denied.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":3" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-01 |title=Case 8:25-cv-01119-MSS-LSG Document 30: ORDER |url=https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.30.0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250625231154/https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411/gov.uscourts.flmd.441411.30.0.pdf |archive-date=2025-06-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Court Listener}}</ref>
+#There were some blunders in the Proven Industries side of the legal case. These include:
+##A witness said to be the Proven Industries lock expert not being able to explain to the judge if he was an employee of Proven Industries or another company and also admitting that he did learn how to shim the Latch Pin Lock after watching McNally's videos and practicing for a while. (This statement undermined the Proven Industries assertion that McNally had disassembled the lock and used trickery to make it appear that he had shimmed the lock. That assertion was the main thrust of their case against McNally.)
+##When asked about their process for making sure their locks were not vulnerable, the answer from a Proven Industries witness was that nobody calling their customer services department had complained that one of their locks had been opened up by a shim attack. (The average consumer would probably not be able to recognise a lock that had been opened by a shim attack. This answer also made it appear like Proven Industries did not engage people with the sort of skills that Trevor McNally has to test their own products to destruction and may have done more damage to their own reputation than McNally's videos.)
+##When asked, by the judge, about imported lock cylinders, a Proven Industries witness struggled to recall the details and had to estimate how many of their lock cylinders are imported from Europe and China.
+#Proven Industries submitted witness statements and included personal information about their witnesses (including a witness who had expressed concern about being names) without asking for their documents to be submitted under seal. They later complained to the judge that their staff were being harassed and suggested this was somehow McNally's fault. And they made a request to the judge to retro-actively put all the documents in the court case under seal. McNally's lawyers objected to this, citing that Proven Industries had boasted on social media that they were going to use the court case to reveal McNally as a fraud and had therefore created public interest in the case, when they thought it would benefit them. Ian Runkle (a Canadian lawyer who had been creating YouTube videos about the case) also submitted an objection to all the documents in the legal case being sealed. Runkle's objection was stricken from the record by the judge.
+#Proven Industries filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss their case without prejudice. The copyright strikes against Trevor McNally have been lifted.
+The Latch Pin Lock with the vulnerability to shim attacks is still on sale and no product recall has yet been issued.
+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==