EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)

[Simon]

We must be careful.  Just as they are...

There is little doubt that Batteroo are incompetent, arrogant and 'incredibly' unlucky', but to call them scammers is a grey area... and this seems to be what they are playing.

There are a lot of words that fit better, and none of them are complimentary - but until a formal judgement drops - what they are doing is not illegal.  It has very strong elements of questionable conduct, disrespect, dubious morals and other commercial no-no's... but they aren't in this for the long term business, so none of that matters.

they are scammers, even if unintentionally, the law does not make allowances for ignorance. I could screw up plenty of things and just say "well what do you know but I didn't expect that to happen", not many people would take me seriously if i did though, bun instead I am always acutely aware of where I may lack information and training and I learn what I need to know or warn those that matter that this is bigger and needs looking into.

And don't tell me that PC world publishing articles about breakin's at batteroo to steal this highly secret and lucrative "technology" (yea boost converters) was bot orchestrated by them..... And just look at the claims they make, they can't even get basic math right. They are scammers, I'd happily see them nailed to the wall and shot for the useless low lifes they are that have no purpose in our society....

[pickle9000]

I didn't had the time to read through. The problem is having the "izer" on a battery related product? I could understand it if they where using something like "DarkEnergizer". Batterizer seems totally legit to me (as a name).

Alexander.

I agree, to me it is quite far fetched to sue a company based on the izer/iser part of the name.

The "keep clear" of my name is important to a company it strengthens the brand . This may not even be related to the Batteroo's but to others thinking of names now or in the future. Be careful or we will see you in court.

[Howardlong]

I didn't had the time to read through. The problem is having the "izer" on a battery related product? I could understand it if they where using something like "DarkEnergizer". Batterizer seems totally legit to me (as a name).

Alexander.

I agree, to me it is quite far fetched to sue a company based on the izer/iser part of the name.

I agree, but isn't that what US civil (sic) lawyers are famous for?

Certainly looks suspiciously like the IP version of speculative ambulance chasing and money for old rope for the silks.

Still, another twist the the story. 

[Howardlong]

So did anyone predict this turn of events?

I never thought that "Big Battery" would waste their time on something so petty. I'm pretty disappointed that Energizer just granted Bros. Roohparvar such undeserved credibility. Now that the device will not be allowed to fail in the open market, we're going to be listening to this "Big Battery" conspiracy garbage for decades.

Absolutely, it just plays into the hands of the conspiracy theorists. Let it run, let it show for itself what a steaming pile it is, and have done. By trying to shut it down, it demonstrates a concern that it might actually work and have an impact on battery sales. Lawyers, please just shut the ---- up for once.

[photon]

So did anyone predict this turn of events?

I never thought that "Big Battery" would waste their time on something so petty. I'm pretty disappointed that Energizer just granted Bros. Roohparvar such undeserved credibility. Now that the device will not be allowed to fail in the open market, we're going to be listening to this "Big Battery" conspiracy garbage for decades.

I don't believe that a VC doesn't care about whether a product works. There are, after all, financial consequences to fraud, and if Batteriser is not a fraud but a scam, there are consequences to a VC's reputation which again leads to financial consequences. What is fascinating about Batteriser is that they have reputable EE management and a reputable VC who seem to have the unmitigated gall to believe that they can get away with this. To me it seems like suicide on their part.

Pass the hemlock.

[McBryce]

So did anyone predict this turn of events?

Yes, they did themselves, when they said that "Big battery would go after them"

McBryce.

[Fungus]

I didn't had the time to read through. The problem is having the "izer" on a battery related product? I could understand it if they where using something like "DarkEnergizer". Batterizer seems totally legit to me (as a name).

I agree, to me it is quite far fetched to sue a company based on the izer/iser part of the name.

Me too, but the American legal system isn't for mortals to understand.

[Fungus]

We must be careful.  Just as they are...

There is little doubt that Batteroo are incompetent, arrogant and 'incredibly' unlucky', but to call them scammers is a grey area...

No it isn't. Nobody at Batteroo believes their own claims.

[LabSpokane]

So did anyone predict this turn of events?

Yes, they did themselves, when they said that "Big battery would go after them"

McBryce.

Well...there may have been a series of cease and decist nastygrams that Batteroo had been receiving for some time. I doubt that the filing with the USPTO was the first communication between the two. This may be a good explanation for the Queen's English spelling -iser instead of the American -izer.

As for the missing portions of the logo on the sheet metal, that's what you get when you try to convert a laser cut prototype into hard tooling without accounting for the weakness of the teeny tiny pieces of metal that will have to punch the holes in stainless steel. While the clip is not thick, stainless is notoriously difficult to work with.

[SL4P]

Just an ignorant question from me...

The IGG campaign was oversubscribed and closed. all good.
Batteriser then moved pre-order public sales to their own website before any IGG product has shipped or validated...

Is that illegal in any way?  It seems very opportunistic  and disingenuous from where I'm sitting.
They're taking trade in the open market for a crowd funded product that hasn't been proven or delivered in any situation yet !

At the very least that would suggest they're exposing themselves to litigation, as engaging in public trade is quite different from 'informed' backers of a development / prototype product...?

[Fungus]

they are scammers, even if unintentionally

Nope. There's nothing unintentional about it.

[EEVblog]

I think nobody expected "Big Battery" to really care about the device and they probably still wouldn't have if they weren't afraid for their brand name being smudged  being associated with Batterizer by consumers.

That's probably the thing.
They have likely gotten engineering to evaluate it, and of course they would come back saying the claims are a load of BS as has everyone else in the industry.
Then they probably decided that because it sounds similar they don't want any chance of being associated with it.

[EEVblog]

I wonder if the Indigogo contributors are also likely to be liable for more than they paid, as they technically can be considered to be shareholders of the company, and might be required to pay in extra to cover the settlement.

It doesn't work like that. There is no legal document that links backers to ownership (and hence liability) in the company.
Effectively the backers are donating money to the company for a promise of something in return, which is not ownership in the company.
There are crowd funding sites that do that (uBeam did it recently), but Indiegogo and Kickstarter et.al are not one of them.

[EEVblog]

I never thought that "Big Battery" would waste their time on something so petty. I'm pretty disappointed that Energizer just granted Bros. Roohparvar such undeserved credibility. Now that the device will not be allowed to fail in the open market, we're going to be listening to this "Big Battery" conspiracy garbage for decades.

That is the most likely unfortunate consequence of this event.
The only way to avoid that is if Bateroo quickly change the name, settle the lawsuit, and then continue to deliver as promised. But it doesn't sound likely.

[EEVblog]

Rename the product DurexCell. It's a sleeve over a stick anyway.

 

[CrashO]

Rename the product DurexCell. It's a sleeve over a stick anyway. What could possibly go wrong.

With the level of safety I expect batteriser will deliver. Durex might feel it inflicts on their proper safety rating and staring suing, just like energizer... 

[Fungus]

Rename the product DurexCell. It's a sleeve over a stick anyway.

 

Isn't "Durex" a brand of adhesive tape in Austria? 

[photon]

Not sure what claim does Energizer have, that monkey looks nothing like a bunny.

I do not think the monkey was a coincidence. Really, cute animal banging cymbals, like the bunny bangs the drum! Making a monkey out of the Energizer marketing brand. The chutzpah of these guys is as big as their delusion.

[Brumby]

I think nobody expected "Big Battery" to really care about the device and they probably still wouldn't have if they weren't afraid for their brand name being smudged  being associated with Batterizer by consumers.

That's probably the thing.
They have likely gotten engineering to evaluate it, and of course they would come back saying the claims are a load of BS as has everyone else in the industry.
Then they probably decided that because it sounds similar they don't want any chance of being associated with it.

A big +1

[quad]

How long can Batteriser withhold this information from the IGG backers?

[g.lewarne]

How long can Batteriser withhold this information from the IGG backers?

no idea. But it would be pretty amusing if anyone here who is a backer (I know some of you are) posted some links to the dispute.  Interestings to see how long the comments stays up

[Jay_Diddy_B]

Hi,

There was this press release:

SAN JOSE, Calif., Sept. 17, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Batteroo Inc. today announced the expansion of its Advisory Board with the addition of former Eveready Senior Technology Fellow Dr. George Blomgren...



Eveready is part of Energizer. You would have thought that Dr. Blomgren would have known about Energizer's practice of brand protection and IP litigation?

If you missed the IGG campaign you can still pre-order on Batteriser.com They are still showing a ship date of December 31st 2015. It will be interesting to see how long it takes before this is changed.


In summary we have:

1) A device that would need to violate the maximum power theorem to get the power of a partially depleted AA battery.

We also videos that show that the claims about the increase in battery life in the Garmin GPS are not true

2) We have seen no photos of a pre-production model. If they are planning on shipping Dec 31st, there must be production devices somewhere.

3) A patent application that looks like it will not be granted.

4) A trademark dispute with 'Big Battery'

5) Warren Flick, former president of Kmart, and Sammy Saloum former VP with Radio Shack. I assume that these guys were added to the board to attempt to get a retail product placement. I am not sure if Warren is still on the board.

6) The product of this exercise from the beginning, was not to sell Batterisers, but to sell the company...

7) and https://www.facebook.com/Batteriser which seems somewhat disconnected from Batteriser.

Regards,

Jay_Diddy_B

[Fungus]

How long can Batteriser withhold this information from the IGG backers?

Forever.

IGG backers aren't shareholders, I doubt they have any legal rights whatsoever. They took a bet, that's all.

Batteriser will probably use this as part of their "out"; Big Battery killing the Batteriser - it's perfect for them!

[Kalvin]

Batteriser will probably use this as part of their "out"; Big Battery killing the Batteriser - it's perfect for them!

What if Batteroo changes the Batteriser to something else like Batteroo. Then there won't be any reason not to ship the devices. If that is the case, then using the Big Battery as an excuse will be invalid.

[ErikTheNorwegian]

Dr. George E. Blomgren
Chief Scientist
Imara Corporation
Menlo Park , California 94025
United States
Revenue:    $5 mil. - $10 mil.
$7,000,000
Employees: 20 - 50
Industry:  Energy, Utilities & Waste Treatment , Batteries, Power Storage Equipment & Generators , Electronics ,  More
SIC Codes:  3691
NAICS Codes:  335911
Products and Services: high-performance next-generation lithium-ion batteries
Company Description: A: Imara employs patented materials science to design and manufacture high-power, long-runtime, extended cycle-life lithium-ion battery cells and packs. Imara batteries are designed primarily for high-power applications including power tools, outdoor power equipment, and vehicles.


More at. http://www.zoominfo.com/s/#!search/profile/company?companyId=351418580&targetid=profile