Rick Hinderer sent Cease and Desist to Youtuber for saying the steel was soft in his knife?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quiet said:
I mean, didn't he just say he wants an apology? Listen, if I'm being threatened with a lawsuit, and they send me a multi-page letter spelling out all the things I'd said (with provided links to where I'd said them), and then it said "Just apologize and stop saying this stuff", I'm going to post up an apology, and move on. Simple as that. It's not like I'd actually mean it. Everyone knows that when I said "I'm sorry", I was saying "I'm sorry that I don't care enough about this to get sued into oblivion because I made a big deal over nothing".

I think at this point, it's about TK not wanting to lose face with his social media fanbase.
Click to expand...
I think at this point it's also using this as an opportunity for some free fundraising.
 
Paratrooper06 said:
Okay, then he can dig in and prepare to go to court over it and we will see how it goes.

You can sue anyone for anything. You know this. I guess you gotta do what your bank account can handle, but if he loses this, I don’t think $15K is going to cover it.
Click to expand...
Well, there's that matter of proving damages. How has Hinderer's business been harmed if he can't make enough knives to meet demand?
 
POCEH KOCEB said:
I’m very entertained how you pick who you answer, and how your answers completely don’t make sense.


Why Hinderer would challenge some numbers within the stated norms ?
Click to expand...
My point being, they challenged his testing equipment and his operation of it, but the same equipment measured 11 of 12 Hinderer blades as being in spec. If there was a problem with the equipment, don't you think that would have affected *all* of the readings?
 
3D Anvil said:
He wants an apology and he wants TK to remove all posts and videos referring to the *allegedly* soft blade, but as someone mentioned earlier, that doesn't preclude Hinderer from suing. Also, I'm pretty sure that TK believes he is in the right and he's apparently not interested in apologizing for something he had every right to say.
Click to expand...

Well, it's odd then that everyone has an issue with RHK doing what they did, since they have every right to do so. 🤔
 
3D Anvil said:
My point being, they challenged his testing equipment and his operation of it, but the same equipment measured 11 of 12 Hinderer blades as being in spec. If there was a problem with the equipment, don't you think that would have affected *all* of the readings?
Click to expand...
They challenged the equipment, not the hardness of the blade.. so why would they need to challenge the equipment 12 times? Isn’t one claim of the equipment and his operation being challenged enough? If the equipment is malfunctioning or he doesn’t use it properly, none of his reading would matter.. but the damage to the business is done because of his focus on the blade “out of tolerance”.

Basically, what TK did was like me walking into a lab that tests the clarity of diamonds after reading up how to operate it on YouTube, using my own equipment in testing the clarity of some of Tiffany’s diamonds and saying to a lab tech: “nah, dog… your clarity reading is off on this and I’m going to go blast you on Instagram”.
 
NebulaMask said:
That's quite the non-sequitur. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that people therefore should agree with them doing it. Plenty of lawful but awful things in this world.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you’d read up a few comments you’ll see 3D Anvil 3D Anvil making the argument that RHK smeared TK’s “character and professionalism” by sending the cease and desist.. so at least one person is saying it wasn’t legal.
 
NebulaMask said:
That's quite the non-sequitur. Just because something is legal doesn't mean that people therefore should agree with them doing it. Plenty of lawful but awful things in this world.
Click to expand...
Correct person.

Actually, no. Having a right to do something means you have a right to do something. The court of public opinion doesn't mean anything, and this is especially important to remember in legal matters.
 
Paratrooper06 said:
Actually, if you’d read up a few comments you’ll see 3D Anvil 3D Anvil making the argument that RHK smeared TK’s “character and professionalism” by sending the cease and desist.. so at least one person is saying it wasn’t legal.
Click to expand...
Can't find that post, can you give me a page # so I can see context? Also you can say all sorts of garbage in legal filings that smear the other person (litigation privilege). Doesn't make them inherently illegal.
 
NebulaMask said:
Can't find that post, can you give me a page # so I can see context? Also you can say all sorts of garbage in legal filings that smear the other person (litigation privilege). Doesn't make them inherently illegal.
Click to expand...
Allow me to educate you here: A cease and desist is not a legally binding document.. it is the opinion of an attorney.
 
Hackenslash said:
Too much here to read every post, but a couple of comments.

1. Before I sold out and went into marketing/management, I'd spent most of my life working in and running materials testing labs. IT IS NEVER AS SIMPLE AS CALIBRATING THE EQUIPMENT AND RUNNING THE TEST. I won't waste time going down the rabbit hole, but folks who believe that fallacy run labs that go out of business. Quickly. And in debt. Sometimes big debt.

2. I'm soundly on RHK's side in this. Social media has such a long reach that you have to vigorously defend your business reputation. Tony at Everyday Commentary had to walk back his joking about the scuffle between Microtech and Kershaw and retracted a bunch of stuff in a settlement. It's not about 7000 followers, it's about retweets and shares and likes that allow bad information to spread like wildfire.

3. I think I'm going to go and buy that Hinderer Skinny I've been wanting. If I can find one...
Click to expand...

Hackenslash said:
I'll try to keep it short with a few simple bullet points.
1. Experienced Technicians. There are many elements to any test procedure that require finesse and talent. The more physical the test procedure, the greater the need for skilled operators, like the hardness test in question. Sure, anybody can press the "start" button on a spectrometer and let the host PC do the work, but even with equipment like that there's a sample prep element that can be highly skewed if prepared slightly irregularly.
2. Data Review. All test data is stupid, dumb numbers. A trained engineer/scientist/manager needs to evaluate the data. I've seen so much data come from experienced technicians that's utter BS because it takes a high level review to determine if the data falls within the realm of norm for the test, or is even statistically significant. We used to call that "passing the Ho-Ho test."
3. Sample Integrity. We may be experiencing this issue with the knife in question. There needs to be a "chain of custody" to establish sample integrity. You need to accurately identify the subject material, know where it came from and properly classify it to administer testing in the proper scope. Contaminated samples have wreaked havoc on multiple industries. There are many instances where the method of testing is determined by proper identification of the sample material.
4. Quality Assurance and Calibration. It's not just enough to calibrate the equipment performing the test, you need to calibrate (or verify) the calibration equipment. There are lab standards for a broad spectrum of physical tests and they need to be verified or replaced as the calibration materials drop out of date. Even standardized weights and feeler gauges have to be re-verified of replaced on a regular schedule.
5. Quality Systems. There needs to be a process to address non-compliance, whether of test materials, equipment or technicians. Peer review is critical to periodically "refresh" the lab processes and root out failures. Shared, round robin samples need to be evaluated and graded for your lab's performance against a pool of other professional labs.
6. Continual Training and Development. Test methods are always changing and new methods are added while others retired. ASTM, AASHTO, NIST and EN publish new, revised methods each year. A lab must always train and retrain staff to insure the latest, accepted methods are complied with. There are a lot of famous failures in the private lab business that derive from a 2-year old method being run in error.

This is really just the tip of the iceberg, but I am highly skeptical of social media personalities who buy a piece of equipment, read a test method and think they can report accurate results.

Sorry for making everyone's eyeballs bleed...

Edit: I want to add that if anyone wants to do their own testing at home to learn and understand, I fully support that. The difference comes when you state it as "fact" via social media, you damn well better have everything mentioned above in place or you will loose any challenge that comes as a result of your claims. No lab operates without a generous liability insurance policy either...
Click to expand...

Such a breath of fresh air to read such an intelligent reply, and as mentioned "really just the tip of the iceberg".
 
Quiet said:
Correct person.

Actually, no. Having a right to do something means you have a right to do something. The court of public opinion doesn't mean anything, and this is especially important to remember in legal matters.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Having the right to do something doesn't mean people can't judge those actions as morally/ethically wrong or whatever. Court of public opinion matters as well, just not inside a courtroom (well it shouldn't but lets be real, it does there too esp. if the public opinion is on a large scale).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top