Fitness YouTuber fights back against equipment maker’s defamation lawsuit

Connecticut-based health tools reviewer Adrian Gluck printed an in depth response on November 20, 2025, defending his damaging evaluation of Vulcan Energy Coaching Techniques’ TALOS All-In-One Health club after the North Carolina producer filed a federal defamation lawsuit towards him on October 31. The 17-minute video response, titled “I Received Sued…,” systematically addresses allegations within the criticism whereas sustaining that each assertion in his unique evaluation represents truthful evaluation primarily based on greater than three months of testing.

Gluck operates Gluck’s Gym, a family-run YouTube channel with 91,700 subscribers that produces health tools critiques. The lawsuit filed within the Western District of North Carolina below case quantity 3:25-cv-878 alleges defamation, violations of the Lanham Act for false promoting, and unfair competitors after Gluck printed a September 2025 video calling the $4,000 TALOS product “the worst product I’ve ever reviewed.”

YouTuber’s protection emphasizes documentation and communication

Gluck acknowledged he had the rack system for greater than three months earlier than publishing his evaluation, which he characterised as “a greater than truthful period of time to check it and to speak with Vulcan.” In line with his response, roughly 70 emails have been exchanged between his group and Vulcan, together with a number of cellphone calls. “I consider I did my due diligence,” Gluck acknowledged in his response video.

The reviewer described the lawsuit as “a bullying tactic” and “intimidation,” noting that Gluck’s Health club operates as a small household enterprise consisting of himself, his spouse, and an editor. “We shouldn’t have the cash, time, and assets to battle lawsuits,” he acknowledged. The channel established a GoFundMe marketing campaign to assist cowl authorized bills after paying a retainer to an legal professional.

Gluck defined his determination to battle the lawsuit relatively than retract his evaluation facilities on broader implications for client safety and reviewer independence. “This might have large ramifications not solely on customers, however reviewers, too,” he acknowledged. “If firms can simply threaten or sue individuals for making sincere critiques, then no one’s going to make them as a result of they will concern the repercussions.”

Timeline disputes over product request and evaluation association

The criticism alleges Gluck “persuaded” Vulcan and “endured in making renewed requests” to obtain the TALOS for evaluation. Gluck disputed this characterization, offering e mail proof displaying intensive back-and-forth communication initiated by Vulcan’s CEO in July 2024.

In line with Gluck’s timeline, the CEO of Vulcan reached out about reviewing the TALOS and Forge rack programs. The product took months to reach attributable to inventory points and area constraints in Gluck’s gymnasium. “I had bother determining what to order as a result of as I mentioned to Vulcan, the web site is troublesome to navigate and perceive,” Gluck acknowledged.

E mail correspondence proven within the response video demonstrates that Vulcan requested about together with and reviewing extra gadgets past the TALOS. “For my part, there was a mutual curiosity within the evaluation,” Gluck acknowledged. The association included no written contract and no cash exchanged, with the rack to be returned to Vulcan after the evaluation.

Meeting issues documented from preliminary set up

Gluck’s most detailed protection addresses meeting points that fashioned a central criticism in his unique evaluation. When the rack arrived in June 2025, his group instantly communicated issues to Vulcan, together with insufficient instructions, cables that weren’t easy, unfastened cables, and further and lacking components.

The TALOS ships with schematic pages printed on 8.5-by-11-inch paper consisting of 4 steps. “The schematics are simply these photos I am displaying you proper now,” Gluck acknowledged, displaying the minimal documentation in his response video. He contrasted this with Rep Health’s Aries 2.0, which has comparable performance and gives directions with roughly 50 steps that embody notations, callouts, and high-resolution element.

Vulcan later emailed extra meeting directions consisting of a six-page step-by-step information with textual content and photos displaying cable routing for a six-post rack. Gluck bought a four-post configuration. “I didn’t ever admit to lacking the instructions the primary time,” he acknowledged. “I mentioned, I do not see an e mail from his worker, and Cyrus, the CEO, later admitted his worker by no means despatched them to me.”

The criticism alleges Gluck falsely claimed the rear crossmember may solely be put in a technique. Gluck confirmed the primary schematic step in his response, zooming in on the crossmember illustration. “I additionally do not see any point out of its orientation on the step-by-step instructions, however with that half being 3×3, it has symmetrical mounts and might undoubtedly be put in the other way up,” he acknowledged.

Cable pressure issues central to evaluation criticisms

A number of factors in Vulcan’s criticism deal with Gluck’s statements about cable pressure and pulley programs. The producer alleges these claims are objectively false and deceptive. Gluck offered detailed technical rebuttals to every allegation.

Concerning pulley grooves, Gluck famous that Vulcan makes use of a number of different-sized pulleys in several areas all through the TALOS. “They don’t seem to be refuting the portion of that very same assertion, that rant they name it, on how I assumed a few of these pulleys have been too small for the diameter of the cable they have been utilizing,” he acknowledged.

The criticism characterizes as false Gluck’s assertion that customers can’t modify cable pressure from the trolley. Gluck clarified this misrepresents his precise criticism. “Within the clip they’re referring to, I am speaking about how I’ve two totally different cable lengths on the left and proper facet of the low row,” he acknowledged. “Each side are too unfastened. But it surely’s the unevenness I am speaking about.”

The TALOS trolley system permits three pressure positions. “Sure, you’ll be able to modify the cable pressure on Vulcan’s trolley. It may be set to considered one of three positions, but when the cables are unfastened, irrespective of the way you modify them, that pressure system does not work,” Gluck acknowledged. “All I can do is make them looser.”

Vulcan acknowledged in communications that cables have a tolerance of roughly 1.75 inches and acknowledged that almost all of consumers don’t take into account an inch or so of slack an issue. “To me that reveals they know concerning the slack. It is supposed they usually do not suppose it is an issue,” Gluck acknowledged.

Throughout a July cellphone dialog, Vulcan’s CEO admitted he didn’t understand how firms like Rogue Health and Rep Health carried out trolley cable pressure programs with adjustment bolts. “The CEO mentioned as a small firm, they weren’t capable of analysis or buy different programs to search out out,” Gluck acknowledged, noting he knowledgeable the CEO that Rogue and Rep’s instructions are hosted publicly on-line.

Why the TALOS is problematic in keeping with Gluck’s unique evaluation

Gluck’s September 2025 evaluation video, which accrued over 99,000 views, offered intensive technical criticism that kinds the idea of Vulcan’s lawsuit. The 12-minute video opens with a picture of the TALOS in a flaming trash bin.

“I will begin this one off with an apology,” Gluck acknowledged within the unique evaluation. “Whereas I recognize Vulcan sending us the Talos for evaluation, I am sorry. If I paid effectively over 4 grand for this factor, I might be pissed.”

Meeting expertise characterised as worst in years of testing

Gluck acknowledged he has constructed dozens of comparable programs and works on tools meeting virtually each week. “This is perhaps the worst expertise I’ve had,” he acknowledged within the evaluation. The meeting course of took days in comparison with 4 hours for Rogue’s extra complicated Rhino coach.

“In case you check out these sick directions, every part’s finished in 4 straightforward steps besides, you recognize, step two the place it is really like 35 steps in a single,” Gluck acknowledged. He documented putting in the underside crossmember the other way up with no indication in instructions about correct orientation.

The {hardware} consists of a number of sizes all inside 5 millimeters of one another. “They’re caked in grease, so there’s simply grease and oil on every part right here,” Gluck acknowledged. “I mainly resulted in constructing it by wanting on the low res grainy ass photos they have on their web site.”

Cable friction creates unresponsive really feel

After spending days on meeting and one other half day making changes, Gluck demonstrated important cable slack within the unique evaluation. “We dancing with that cable slack,” he acknowledged whereas displaying the unfastened cables on digital camera.

The evaluation detailed how the TALOS makes use of progressively smaller pulleys from backside to prime. “These entrance pulleys, they’re massive, they work effectively sufficient, the bearings are high quality. Then you definately go straight as much as a smaller pulley and it really finally ends up on the prime and the underside. So irrespective of the way you pull with a fair smaller pulley,” Gluck acknowledged.

“You are making an attempt to route these massive, thick, stiff cables by progressively smaller pulleys, it introduces lots of friction,” he continued. “On lots of these pulleys, the groove is just too small for this thick cable. Once more, extra friction. So, it is not responsive.”

The TALOS options two 300-pound weight stacks with a 2:1 ratio on the purposeful coach. “If I set my weight to 33 lb, as a result of why would you promote a weight stack in the US in kilos? Simply do it in kilos. 33 lb. I’ve acquired a 16 12 lb beginning weight and it looks like 40 lb,” Gluck acknowledged.

Low row design creates security considerations

Gluck characterised the low row as “the world’s lowest low row” with an attachment level positioned at a clumsy 90-degree angle. “Tremendous awkward, however let me simply pop an attachment in right here for you, and you may see how enjoyable that is,” he acknowledged whereas struggling to insert attachments.

The evaluation confirmed how customers should lengthen a telescoping plate to realize vary of movement throughout workout routines. “Now acquired these massive 300 lb stacks. I’ve acquired 300 lb to work with. It is a 2:1 ratio. You mix it finally ends up being 1:1. You get 300 lb. That is nice,” Gluck acknowledged. “And after I’m finished in my set, I simply break my very own ft as a result of the one approach I can get vary of movement, this weight is now sitting on the bones of my ft proper now, is to telescope this factor out.”

“I can not modify the cable pressure on the trolley like you are able to do with actually each different cable machine on the market,” Gluck acknowledged, demonstrating uneven cable lengths on the left and proper sides of the low row.

Lat pull-down suffers from design compromises

The lat pull-down perform consists of twin pull factors that may connect in two configurations. “Vulcan provides you this plate you can strap up right here, aka like reps Aries 1.0,” Gluck acknowledged. Alternatively, customers can connect an aluminum bar.

Gluck demonstrated problem clipping the attachments: “We clip one in. Clip the opposite facet. Was tremendous good. No issues there.” The assertion dripped with sarcasm because the video confirmed him scuffling with the mechanism.

The lat bar holder doesn’t match correctly in its designated area. “I do not know why. Why would not you design one the place it matches within the area it is supposed to suit?” Gluck acknowledged whereas displaying the misaligned holder.

Rack specs restrict compatibility

The TALOS makes use of 3×3-inch uprights with one-inch holes, however gap spacing varies all through the rack. Some sections use Sorinex-style gap spacing the place holes align vertically, stopping attachments from positioning shut to one another as a result of they share the identical gap.

Higher sections characteristic half-inch holes relatively than the usual 5/8-inch holes used on most 3×3 racks. “Why would you do 5/8? Effectively, each 3×3 rack is 1 in or 5/8. So, at the least in the event that they swap there, you can type of make an argument, however they did not,” Gluck acknowledged.

The crossmembers lack vertical holes, eliminating versatility for band pegs and storage options. “I can not use band pegs on this factor. If I had a six publish rack, I can not connect something right here. I can not retailer something right here like I do on my different racks,” Gluck acknowledged.

Comparability with competitor merchandise

Gluck famous that Vulcan launched the TALOS after Rep Health launched the Aries 1.0, which pioneered the all-in-one rack idea for house gyms with 90-degree rotated weight stacks. “The issue with that’s it cluttered the again of the rack, so that you could not do incline press again right here,” Gluck acknowledged.

“Vulcan noticed that, rotated the stacks backward, supplying you with area,” he continued, crediting Vulcan with this design enchancment. Nonetheless, Rep Health subsequently launched the Aries 2.0, which advanced quite a few parts whereas Vulcan continued promoting the TALOS with its unique design.

“If I used to be one of many those that spent my cash on this, I might be pissed if I spent about $4500 on this construct,” Gluck acknowledged. “I may have gotten a equally constructed Rep Aries 2.0 for that very same amount of cash. And that rack is a number of occasions what this factor is.”

Affiliate relationship allegations disputed

Vulcan’s criticism alleges Gluck fabricated a damaging evaluation of a small producer to domesticate a popularity for fearless critiques whereas defending affiliate income from giant producers like Rogue Health and Rep Health. Gluck addressed this allegation with particular monetary particulars and channel historical past.

Vulcan’s affiliate proportion for Gluck’s channel was set at 12 %, which Gluck acknowledged represents his highest affiliate proportion. The TALOS valued at over $4,000 would generate roughly $500 per affiliate sale. Rep Health’s affiliate proportion stands at 5 %, that means a equally priced product would pay “effectively below half that.” Rogue Health’s affiliate proportion is even decrease than Rep’s.

Gluck cited his channel’s historical past of criticizing main producers. “We have been harsh on Titan Health many occasions they usually’re one other giant producer,” he acknowledged. He famous his essential evaluation of Fringe Sports activities DNA 1.0 when different reviewers praised it, main Fringe to deal with the criticisms and launch an improved 2.0 model.

The channel has printed optimistic critiques of quite a few small producers. “We actually favored Maxim’s rack, which was a equally priced all-in-one type rack,” Gluck acknowledged. That video was printed inside a month of the TALOS video. “We have been the primary to cowl dialed movement and on the time they have been comparatively unknown within the area.”

Gluck revealed that after Vulcan retrieved the TALOS from his house, the corporate despatched the identical rack to a different reviewer. “Actually the identical precise rack I reviewed went from my home to that reviewers,” he acknowledged. That reviewer, who had no information Gluck’s evaluation was forthcoming, additionally delivered an unfavorable evaluation after unbiased testing.

Determination to publish regardless of ongoing communications

Vulcan contacted Gluck in mid-August 2025 stating that upgraded components could be delayed and supplied to retrieve the product. Gluck agreed to the retrieval, however no one confirmed when it will happen. In late August, a contractor reached out to Gluck saying he was coming to gather the rack however was having bother contacting Vulcan.

“I used to be a bit taken again by that, which is why I emailed them saying I might have appreciated a heads up earlier than sending somebody to my home,” Gluck acknowledged. After this incident and contemplating that Vulcan had been promoting the rack since 2023, Gluck determined to publish the evaluation.

“I felt like we had performed e mail and cellphone tag lengthy sufficient,” he acknowledged. “This did not appear to be going wherever and the fixes we had mentioned would not have addressed lots of the different points my evaluation mentions that their criticism does not, like how the Lo can apply strain to your ft, which may injure you.”

Gluck characterised Vulcan’s proposed options as “band-aid fixes that did not deal with main issues” and concluded “the Talos was an outdated design that had too many flaws.” He acknowledged that publishing the evaluation represented “the correct factor to do” from an ethical perspective regardless of understanding the potential repercussions.

Implications for reviewer independence and client safety

The case checks basic questions on product evaluation speech protections in influencer advertising and marketing. Fitness equipment maker files defamation suit against YouTuber notes the lawsuit seeks to characterize Gluck’s statements as objectively false claims relatively than protected opinion.

Courts typically defend vigorous criticism and subjective opinions about merchandise, however not false statements of verifiable incontrovertible fact that harm enterprise popularity. The criticism’s detailed technical allegations try to determine that Gluck’s evaluation accommodates demonstrably false factual claims relatively than reliable essential opinion.

The stress between affiliate income relationships and genuine critiques has intensified as influencer advertising and marketing matures. Information reveals that influencers convert buyers six occasions greater than social media total, with the share of income from associates and companions reaching 20.3 % on Cyber Monday 2024, up 6.8 % year-over-year.

Latest regulatory developments have expanded disclosure necessities throughout digital promoting sectors. FTC to combat fake reviews and testimonials detailed new guidelines prohibiting faux critiques, undisclosed paid testimonials, and different misleading practices involving client suggestions. The FTC estimates these guidelines may save customers between $6.64 billion and $17.52 billion yearly by better-informed buying selections.

The Vulcan case differs from current FTC enforcement actions concentrating on misleading enterprise practices. FTC settles with e-commerce scheme operators in massive fraud case concerned false earnings claims and systematic suppression of damaging critiques by authorized threats. The health tools dispute as an alternative facilities on whether or not damaging technical assessments represent protected criticism or actionable defamation.

A number of current instances involving AI-generated content material have established new precedent for know-how firm legal responsibility. Minnesota solar company sues Google over false AI-generated claims and Activist sues Google over AI-generated false claims in second tech lawsuit display how defamation legislation applies to algorithmically generated content material.

Worldwide developments present how evaluation programs face manipulation threats. German businesses systematically delete critical reviews using EU Digital Services Act documented widespread abuse of reporting mechanisms to take away unfavorable enterprise critiques by false defamation claims.

Timeline

• July 2024: Vulcan CEO reaches out to Gluck about reviewing TALOS and Forge rack programs
• June 2025: Vulcan ships TALOS valued at over $4,000 to Gluck at no cost; meeting issues instantly communicated
• July 2025: Cellphone dialog between Gluck and Vulcan CEO discussing rack points and cable pressure programs
• Mid-August 2025: Vulcan provides to retrieve product attributable to components delay; Gluck agrees
• Late August 2025: Contractor contacts Gluck about retrieving rack; Gluck posts “60-second gymnasium tour” video calling TALOS “a pile of shit”
• September 2025: Gluck publishes 12-minute video titled “This Is The Worst Product I’ve Ever Reviewed…” on YouTube; video accumulates over 99,000 views
• October 31, 2025: Vulcan recordsdata lawsuit in Western District of North Carolina below case quantity 3:25-cv-878
• November 20, 2025: Gluck publishes 17-minute response video titled “I Received Sued…” defending evaluation and establishing GoFundMe for authorized bills

Abstract

Who: Adrian Gluck and Gluck’s Health club LLC, a Connecticut-based family-run health tools evaluation channel with 91,700 YouTube subscribers, face federal lawsuit from Superior Health Ideas d/b/a Vulcan Energy Coaching Techniques, a veteran-owned North Carolina health tools producer.

What: Defamation lawsuit alleging false and deceptive statements in product evaluation video, with Gluck defending his damaging evaluation of the TALOS All-In-One Health club primarily based on documented meeting issues, cable pressure points, design flaws, and security considerations found throughout greater than three months of testing with intensive communication with the producer.

When: Lawsuit filed October 31, 2025, following September 2025 video publication and months of product testing and communications extending again to June 2025 when Vulcan shipped the $4,000 rack system; Gluck printed detailed response November 20, 2025.

The place: Case filed in Charlotte Division of Western District of North Carolina the place Vulcan maintains operations; Gluck operates from Connecticut; dispute facilities on video content material distributed globally by way of YouTube, Patreon, and Instagram platforms.

Why: Gluck maintains he printed truthful criticism to serve client pursuits after figuring out the TALOS had basic design flaws that may not be adequately addressed by proposed fixes; Vulcan alleges fabricated damaging evaluation designed to guard affiliate income relationships with competing producers whereas cultivating popularity for fearless critiques.