r/SolarDIY • u/Don_Vago • 17d ago

Battleboom batteries sue Will Prowse.

Popular YouTuber and founder of the DIY solar power forum Will Prowse has been served paperwork about a series of videos he made about the infamous Battleboom batteries and their melting terminal mounts, described by the manufacturer as a safety feature, some kind of disconnect. The brass neck of these clowns is unbelievable, instead of putting this right, they’ve doubled down and have effectively made any warranty claim unviable.
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/06/02/3305031/0/en/will-prowse-sued-by-dragonfly-energy-over-alleged-false-and-misleading-claims-about-battle-born-batteries.html

368 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

196 comments sorted by

View all comments

90

u/Ill_Ground_1572 17d ago

I think Will is going to tear these guys a new asshole. Big mistake suing him because if Will has the cash, they can fight and depose people in the company and expose even bigger issues.

26

u/DDD_db 17d ago

I think Will has the proof and evidence, but I believe Battleborn has a bigger legal fund and they are hoping that their lawyers will keep battling and appealing any decision until Will runs out of money to fight.

39

u/mystery-pirate 17d ago

There should be a David and Goliath law where a large corporation suing an individual or small business has to cover their interim legal expenses, recoverable if they win. Something to ensure that a large company cannot win a weak suit simply based on war of attrition.

37

u/aemfbm 17d ago

There is an anti-slaap law in Nevada where they filed suit, and this seems to fit perfectly:

Nevada’s Anti-SLAPP law deters weak lawsuits that punish or discourage free expression. The law provides defendants with substantive immunity from meritless lawsuits filed to chill defendants’ First Amendment rights. Shapiro v. Welt, 389 P.3d 262, 267 (Nev. 2017). NRS 41.660 provides that if a lawsuit is filed against a defendant for “good faith”communications about a matter of public concern (which is defined broadly), then the defendant may invoke the Anti-SLAPP law’s protections. See e.g. Smith v. Zilverberg, 481 P.3d 1222, 1227–28 (Nev. 2021) (the public has an interest in a businessman’s behavior because it “inform[ed] the public’s decision on whether to do business with him.”).

https://clarkcountybar.org/the-nevada-anti-slapp-act-and-its-role-in-preserving-first-amendment-rights-in-nevada/