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

[g.lewarne]

I wonder if the next  delay will be due to "an act of God"

Shipment stolen by Big Battery!

[ccs46]

I wonder if the next  delay will be due to "an act of God"

Shipment stolen by Big Battery!

Stolen By an drop out art student!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[g.lewarne]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog

Just wait, they will

[pickle9000]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog

Just wait, they will

They will, but it means they are ineffective designers and manufacturers. Every product has a down side, a great salesman can sell shoes to a guy with no legs.

[rrinker]

This whole thing is so funny (unless you are one of the investor). Dave has provided verifiable scientific evidence why this thing can't possibly do what the claim, and their entire rebuttal to date is essentially that Dave is too stupid because he isn't a PhD and thus can't understand their laws of physics defying breakthrough. As pointed out, it would be stupidly simple to prove their side. If they really are making these things, then they absolutely must have a working prototype they could send out for reviews.
 As for scam or not, there really are two choices. Either they are naive and don't understand what they are doing, or they fully understand that the science is against them. Given the high level of education they claim, it sure seems like they should know exactly what they are doing, in which case there's no doubt, it's a deliberate attempt to defraud people with a product that cannot do what is claimed. There's really not much grey area here.

[g.lewarne]

This whole thing is so funny (unless you are one of the investor). Dave has provided verifiable scientific evidence why this thing can't possibly do what the claim, and their entire rebuttal to date is essentially that Dave is too stupid because he isn't a PhD and thus can't understand their laws of physics defying breakthrough. As pointed out, it would be stupidly simple to prove their side. If they really are making these things, then they absolutely must have a working prototype they could send out for reviews.
 As for scam or not, there really are two choices. Either they are naive and don't understand what they are doing, or they fully understand that the science is against them. Given the high level of education they claim, it sure seems like they should know exactly what they are doing, in which case there's no doubt, it's a deliberate attempt to defraud people with a product that cannot do what is claimed. There's really not much grey area here.

I am starting to question whether they have *ever* had even working prototypes.  Sure, we have seen things that look like a batteriser, but they could have been props with no actual circuitry present, a straight through + connector.  The only media test I can find is from Yahoo, and they could not make it work.

[EEVblog]

This whole thing is so funny (unless you are one of the investor). Dave has provided verifiable scientific evidence why this thing can't possibly do what the claim, and their entire rebuttal to date is essentially that Dave is too stupid because he isn't a PhD and thus can't understand their laws of physics defying breakthrough. As pointed out, it would be stupidly simple to prove their side. If they really are making these things, then they absolutely must have a working prototype they could send out for reviews.

Not only that, but they could publish performance curves and data like they promised and never did.

[EEVblog]

I am starting to question whether they have *ever* had even working prototypes. 

No, this is wrong, several different media people have seen it work in the apple keyboard.
Working prototypes exist.
It's not that hard to get something like this built and working.

[LabSpokane]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog

Just wait, they will

r

They already are. Dave's battery cutout voltage video begat the whole monkey butt ...err...rebuttal. 

[pickle9000]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog

Just wait, they will

r

They already are. Dave's battery cutout voltage video begat the whole monkey butt ...err...rebuttal. 

Maybe probes was a real monkey dressed up to look like a toy. He gets loose from his cage and kills a couple of the "engineers" and their parents came looking for them (the engineers). The Batterizer group could be hiding the whole thing. Just think how probes the monkey feels being probed every day, the poor thing. 

[SL4P]

Maybe probes was a real monkey dressed up to look like a toy. He gets loose from his cage and kills a couple of the "engineers" and their parents came looking for them (the engineers). The Batterizer group could be hiding the whole thing. Just think how probes the monkey feels being probed every day, the poor thing.

OMG!  I've figured it out.
Probes the Monkey is in fact Batteriser Bob in disguise...!  All this acrimony and distraction is an effort to strop us from making that connection (excuse the pun), and sticking the probes up his 'donkey' once and for all.

[EEVblog]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog
Just wait, they will

r
They already are. Dave's battery cutout voltage video begat the whole monkey butt ...err...rebuttal. 

Of course they won't focus on other bloggers who have busted them either, I'm the poster boy 

[SL4P]

This link may have been posted previously, but I see in the fine detail, that a Trade Mark opposition was lodged & accepted two weeks ago (15 Dec 2015)
https://trademarks.justia.com/865/71/batteriser-86571275.html

EDIT: Added:
Big Battery are in the court.  Wait for sparks to fly.
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/

Interestingly, they seem to be going after the risk of consumer confusion between ENERGIZER anbd BATTERISER...

[pickle9000]

at some point, if they are not actually manufacturing, and they are planning an exit strategy, they are going to point some kinda blame at Dave / EEVBlog
Just wait, they will

r
They already are. Dave's battery cutout voltage video begat the whole monkey butt ...err...rebuttal. 

Of course they won't focus on other bloggers who have busted them either, I'm the poster boy 

Dave, if they invite you to their lab to see a test, be careful. Remember what happened to probes (the monkey). Humans already have the optimum number of holes in them.

[LabSpokane]

This link may have been posted previously, but I see in the fine detail, that a Trade Mark opposition was lodged & accepted two weeks ago (15 Dec 2015)
https://trademarks.justia.com/865/71/batteriser-86571275.html

EDIT: Added:
Big Battery are in the court.  Wait for sparks to fly.
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/

Interestingly, they seem to be going after the risk of consumer confusion between ENERGIZER anbd BATTERISER...

I think you discovered the actual natural disaster that has impacted Batteroo. All their tooling and branded inventory - if any exists - is now scrap. They have no money to fight this unless someone had the foresight to buy legal insurance.

[jippie]

This link may have been posted previously, but I see in the fine detail, that a Trade Mark opposition was lodged & accepted two weeks ago (15 Dec 2015)
[...]
Interestingly, they seem to be going after the risk of consumer confusion between ENERGIZER anbd BATTERISER...

I think you discovered the actual natural disaster that has impacted Batteroo. All their tooling and branded inventory - if any exists - is now scrap. They have no money to fight this unless someone had the foresight to buy legal insurance.

I wonder if all this would've been an issue if they had just been crowdfunding this as a project rather than having the ability to order the products from their webstore after the campain has closed. What I mean to say is that there are countless projects that just do a one of run once funded and that's that. No patents and trademarks stuff.

[Fungus]

[nterestingly, they seem to be going after the risk of consumer confusion between ENERGIZER anbd BATTERISER...

So in the end it is Big Battery that's killing them.

(and this gives them a legitimate way to "run out of money"... a completely clean escape route  )

[SeanB]

They have no money to fight this unless someone had the foresight to buy legal insurance.

I would guess that insurance was the first thing they got, that way they are able to use somebody else’s money to do the fighting, andd they probably were pretty sure they would need it.

[pickle9000]

Just think how big battery would be after them if it actually worked (as described)?

[miguelvp]

Just think how big battery would be after them if it actually worked (as described)?

Big battery probably welcomed such device (if it worked) since everything seems to be going the Li-ion way.

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

[SeanB]

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

Look and feel, a furry small stuffed animated animal, that could cause confusion in the target market. Though the sound of the name is more likely to lead to confusion, not helped by them also having used branded cells ( instead of a white or pale blue no name branded sleeve over the demo cells) which could lead the the assumption that this use is sanctioned by the trademark holder.

[Chipguy]

....
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/
....

On page 33 of that last document:
"...BATTERISER, Prosecution History, Notice of Pseudo Mark (April 1, 2015) (creating the pseudo mark “BATTERY RISER”)...."

April 1st... there you got it 
Nice coincidence... going on with 

[photon]

Energizer takes a page from Dave and goes after their credibility. From the Notice of Opposition:

The Applied-For Marks Are Deceptive Or Alternatively Deceptively Mis-Descriptive.

12. The Applied-For Mark are deceptive because they bestow upon the product
identified by Applied-For Marks an appearance of greater quality or salability than it has in fact.

14. Upon information and belief, the product identified by Applied-For Marks,
however, does not actually raise or increase the stored energy of the battery. Instead, as
indicated in Applicant’s recitation of goods, the identified product merely provides access to
existing stored energy found within the battery, i.e., “sleeve to be used with disposable batteries to extract stored energy and extend battery life.” (Emphasis added).

15. This deception is material because it relates to a character, quality or function of
the identified product and because prospective purchasers are likely to believe that the deception actually describes the product.

[jippie]

On page 33 of that last document:
"...BATTERISER, Prosecution History, Notice of Pseudo Mark (April 1, 2015) (creating the pseudo mark “BATTERY RISER”)...."

This video blogger "syyenergy7" mentions Battery Riser consistently:

[SeanB]

Another deluded guy, cannot realise there is a difference between voltage and power. For the price of batteriser you can buy a lot of decent rechargeable cells. Saying even if it does not work it is fine. Why does he not go and throw money in the dumpster every day, it is still possible a dumpster diver might get it before it goes to landfill.