Scent Lok Being Sued???


LifeNRA

Recommended Posts

From the provided link.

........."has duped hunters out of millions of dollars by selling them a product that doesn't work."

If these guys intend to sue every maunfacturer out there that sell do-dads that don't work they're gonna be some very busy beavers...:rolleyes:

Like so many products related to hunting if the hunter thinks a product is working for him he's happy, this rarely has anything to do with whether or not the product actually works...

hangunnr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you can't completely eliminate scent, you can reduce it. I think some people fail to realize this and are taking it too literal or they have been mislead in the advertising to believe that Scent-Lok is an actual complete scent eliminator. Either way it's silly for people to think that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading something about this a couple of weeks ago on here. I think this whole law suit is stupid. Now anyone who is on a record as buying any product will get something in the mail that there is a lawsuit. I hope those that are suing lose. But it won't deter anyone from suing in the future. What a country we live in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you can't completely eliminate scent, you can reduce it. I think some people fail to realize this and are taking it too literal or they have been mislead in the advertising to believe that Scent-Lok is an actual complete scent eliminator. Either way it's silly for people to think that.

While I do agree, maybe just maybe the companies have been misleading the consumers. I mean after all the commercials do say" forget the wind, just hunt". If what the posted article says is in fact true, the carbon clothing companies have in fact been advertising falsely and misleading, does that justify a lawsuit though? Not for me to say, however this country sees much more frivilous suits, that are amazingly awarded to folks all the time that make us all just shake our heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personnally, I think Scent Lok just a clever marketing ploy, but like someone else said...there's more than that product out there that may be making false claims. Diet fad products, the hunting and golfing industries are littered with products that supposedly will make you a better outdoorsman or allow you to drive the ball farther...just gimmicks, how can they sue??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you click on the the first link for this moron, it appears that he tried to extort money from Scentlock to shut up about their product supposedly not working. Here is what he posted and what he sent to them:

NEW UNDER HANDED TACTICS by SCENT LOK

I was informed on May 2, 2007, that in their recent Patent re-exam, Scent Lok accuses me of trying to get them to bribe me to not post, talk about or write about my proof that their product cannot work as they claim. The truth of the matter is that I did try to get them to bribe me, in either an e-mail or a signed letter, so that I would have proof of their willingness to bribe me, so I could expose their tactics to the public. I never intended to accept a bribe from them.

I came up with the idea of trying to get them to bribe me after Mike Andrews (of Scent Lok) made the following statement to me: "We look forward to having you as one of our biggest supporters in the future." I took that as an offer to compensate me if I would no longer comment on my beliefs about how their product could not work as they claim.

Here is what I e-mailed Scent Lok on May 2, 2007

Scent Lok:

I understand that your company has accused me of trying to get you to bribe me in your latest patent re-exam. The truth of the matter is, is that I wanted to see if you would offer to bribe me (in an e-mail), so I could expose it to the public. What I wanted to do was show people how far your company would go to shut me up.

Obviously someone at Scent Lok correctly figured out that my belief in the fact that your product does not work (and my Christian morals) would not allow me to accept a bribe from you to keep me quiet about the fact that I do not believe your product works; and therefore Scent Lok did not attempt to bribe me.

So, my ruse failed. And you know what - I will pay for a voice stress test on myself to show that I am telling the truth in this matter. Can you say the same?

If you do not have any reference to me removed from that patent re-exam immediately I will be forced to seek legal recourse.

I have kept a record of this, and will be forwarding a copy to the Patent and Trademark Office.

I know for a fact that you are required by law to bring my explanation of this matter to the attention of the Patent and Trademark Office. If I do not receive a notification from the Patent and Trademark Office, of your notification to them of my explanation of your twisting my intent in this matter, I will contact them myself. I just got off the phone with Mr. Andy Kashnicow (sp?), and he told me who to contact and what to do.

This is all going on my web site, and it is being e-mailed to every editor I have in my database, so they will all know about your tactics.

In your current re-exam you failed to tell the Patent Office that the following quote is on my web site. It clearly states that I would not accept a bribe; you must notify the Patent Office of this too.

T.R. Michels

Apparently, they didn't take the bait and he had to come up with some excuse as to why he is an extortionist.

I smell a scumbag....he must not be wearing their product! :D

New

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I might have to sue Old Spice deodorant. Label says goes on clear, I seen some white residue on my armpits while I applied it. White is not clear. I am truly appalled by this!! I was DUPED!!! Gonna call my lawyer now!! :) lol!!!

We live in a sue happy society guys, sad that our courts have to be filled up with cases like this and ordinary people called in for jury duty have to miss work for some of this non-sense.

Shame people are like this............ :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

caveat emptor.

Personally, nothing is for sure. That scent blocker suit might be a great thing if properly treated prior to. What I mean is it won't work if you throw it on at the house and smoke cigarettes in the truck all the way to your spot. Or a nice mcmuffin that stinks up your truck through the heater vents. Maybe even that pine air freshener that most certainly smells like something other than pine. Either way, I kinda have to look back to some tribal hunter culture. If they can kill a deer wearing a leaf and some fur, with a stick, then I don't really need a $300 scent blocking suit. Really, I just need to learn how to hunt and "work the wind." But i'm not going to freeze, so i'll save the leaf wearing or fur wraps for after hours with the wifey and spend the $300 on something that is going to keep me warm.

As far as the law suit goes, this guy is a dirtbag. If I buy something and it doesn't work, I ask for my money back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

ScentBlocker Works - Test and Court Ruling Says works as claimed

actually better... nice. WOW!:pop:

I'm glad I bought ScentBlocker.

entire court ruling enclosed...

The parties stipulate that carbon can adsorb human odor. The parties

stipulate that the amount of carbon in the product and the process used to embed the

carbon to the product impacts the carbon’s effectiveness. The parties further stipulate

that Robinson’s carbon-embedded clothing contains substantially more carbon and uses a

different application process than other carbon-embedded hunting clothing products

currently on the market.

Robinson has produced evidence of expert testing that

establishes that its garments containing activated carbon are effective at blocking the

transmission of odor through the garments and the amount of carbon used and the process

by which the carbon is embedded in the liner of the hunting clothing makes the odor-

blocking ability of the Robinson products more effective at reducing human odor than

other hunting garments containing carbon as well as non-carbon hunting garments.

10. Robinson has provided evidence of expert testing that establishes that,

after washing and drying, its carbon fabrics continue to be effective at reducing odor

permeation.

11. Robinson has provided expert testing that shows that after washing and

drying its carbon fabrics are “reactivated” and such clothing is restored to some extent for

continued beneficial use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.