[paradoxper]

   
I wouldn't accuse people of lying publicly. Keeping something does not mean he is lying. There is a important difference. @Brooko might have the things in his possession but he doesn't claim ownership. You can possess things (like a stolen car) but you don't own it. As far as I understand, Brooko clearly refuses that ownership to these review samples. He keeps them, some don't want to pay for the shipping back but that doesn't make Brooko the owner. Especially if he refuses to take on ownership of them. He doesn't sell them, nor gives them to other people to use. Legally there is a distinction. What he could do (like you said, he could flip them if he wanted to) doesn't matter. It's not minority report here. It's what he actually does with them that counts. 
 
However, since there are reviewers with lower moral standards that are just in for the freebies, I see the point that mentioning clearly what the agreement with the manufacturer is, would be beneficial.
 
Cheerio!

It's not unsubstantiated so where's the harm. Now we're getting into BS semantics. He doesn't ever claim ownership, but he never ever sends them back. Seriously.
 
What would qualify for ownership? A year of possession, 2 years.. LMAO

 

[Brooko]

It's OK guys - I'm getting the thread closed.  It serves no purpose.  I have my answer - and I certainly don't need any more abuse (being openly called stupid, and accused of lying I believe goes beyond the TOS of this site - but I'll leave that for the powers that be).
 
Thanks for your support.
 
And please don't reply to the guys inciting this anymore.  They can have the last say.  I have a clear conscience regardless of what they think of me.  Just do what I'm now doing - ignore them.

 

[paradoxper]

I said stop playing stupid. I, in fact, called you a liar. because you lied.