I think all the cases people have found with Google Maps are issues with upstream data providers. There are much more subtle ways to catch theft that do not have a negative user experience (the angle an alley connects two roads, or the curve of a highway).
While Dbrand definitely seems keen to pull some stunts, the difference between this versus that is that at least in that case, Dbrand still had to put in the work to replicate the PlayStation 5 faceplates. It's not as though Dbrand owns the inside of a phone: had Casetify done the work and simply created a similar product to Dbrand, this wouldn't be a lawsuit. It's because they stole the end product from Dbrand, which would be more like if Dbrand stole Sony's design files to make the faceplates. Whether what they were trying to pull with the PS5 was actually legal or not is another question, but also, in my opinion it certainly wasn't a dirty theft either way.
It would be unsurprising if that was all intended from the start as a viral marketing campaign. I don't remember hearing that they ever got in any trouble with Sony, and they're pretty infamous for "taunting" others to sue them (and similar stunt language like "our lawyers told us we couldn't make this") in all their marketing.
they significantly changed the "darkplates". The 2.0 lawyer-approved version doesn't even have the distinctive "fins" (or collar or whatever you want to call it) .
Casetify almost definitely never looked at actual internals of actual smartphones, so there was no way for them to know the difference between faithfully replicated details and easter eggs.
Maybe same effect but sounds like the purpose here was to include jokes for their customers (otherwise they probably would have included other things than jokes that can be identified by anyone with a brain)
There's this other thing:
Can apple/samsung/google claim a copyright to the case designs based on the design of its hardware? It really wouldn't be a stretch for Apple to say the specific layout of its macbook or whatever is a type of copyrightable design. Right? I mean, it reflects specific hardware layout design.
This is unlikely to succeed, because a)it is an image of their product taken with their own camera - so if Apple wins here the precedent is you can’t take photos OF an iPhone?? Like hell that’s ever going to happen, and Apple would be idiots to do that anyway, seeing your friends in photos with iPhones in clear view is just free advertising and plays into Apples thing for “Apple users are elite”.
And b)Apple’s copyright refers to hardware design. Dbrand didn’t make hardware - they made an image, or skin, or case. None of these are applicable competitors to Apple’s iPhone.
Highly unlikely, Zach specifically mentioned how their scans are an artistic representation, since the scans undergo heavy editing to highlight certain parts and make the hardware "pop".
This has happened on twitter since at least 2017 afaik. I couldn't really ever load a tweet linked on say, Reddit, without it happening. I think it's intentional (to lock you out if you don't have an account I think) and not just an error. Refreshing usually works though.
