By our fourth round of prototypes we had created a model
with 64mb memory and a 580mhz CPU. This not only runs the
software well, it flies! At last happy with the board, we
designed a simple, minimalist case in plain white to house
it. The end result is our current model. We decided to name
it the anonabox.
They did not create the board nor did they design the case.
It just says they created the complete box, it says nothing about the components. For anybody that has any experience with assembling hardware, it is completely common case to use components from other manufacturers. Apple says "we created iPhone" but they use Samsung chips inside, should they say "Samsung created iPhone" instead? No, because they added their own work to the components, things that the components didn't do before. So the question is - did the source components do what Anonabox is doing? If not, they created something new and have valid claim to that. They don't have to make the silicon and extract the metal from ore to have right to claim that.
It definitely implies they designed the board. Apple certainly designed their own board.
If Apple was buying fully-functional iPhone hardware that only lacked a case then it would be ridiculous for them to claim they had created the iPhone.
For you to say 'complete box' is misleading, because the plastic shell doesn't actually do anything, the bare board is functionally already complete.
The board is not a mere component, it is 95% of the end result.
And especially the wording of creating a model, then evaluating the performance of the board, then designing a case... creation can only apply to the uncased board in that paragraph. If they didn't make the board it's a pack of lies.
It says about technical specs of the product, and it says about how they looked for the hardware that would work for them, but it never says they soldered the board themselves. At least I don't see any of such language on the Kickstarter page, maybe they claimed this in AMA, I didn't read that. The product is what is sold, and if 95% was already there, I personally see no problem in that - a lot of great things were done as adding the final 5% to what already existed but was not as practical. I'm also not sure why anybody would care where the board comes from - as long as it works as a consumer product that didn't exist before, what's the problem?
Right, so I'm not sure yet if there was intent for deception. Sure, the product needs work - like default password, etc. - it should be fixed before it can be reasonably considered a security product, and that's all valid points, but that is not a fraud - it's just a product needing some work, not an uncommon thing on kickstarter. Now if they did claim they built it from scratch then it would be outright deception, and that changes the picture completely.
They're abusing words, here talking about hardware, IIUC they're only valuable addition is the software setup. Putting a board in an already appropriate case isn't creation.
It says "we had created a model with 64mb memory and a 580mhz CPU". That says literally nothing about the source of anything. All that says is "we stuffed various parts in a box".
