Seiko 7A38 - by the numbers

I was watching this Seiko 7A38 YouTube video earlier today, and recognized the wrist photos of our Site Administrator.
https://youtu.be/OTDlrh2Xxwg

And then the video showed off this model, which I’ve never seen before. This is quite different from what I’m used to seeing and now, one of my new favorites. What model number is this?

Thanks for the heads up, Jim. As you can see, I've edited your original title, adding the answer: 7A38-6060 SAA071J.

I had actually seen that YouTube video 3 years ago, when he first uploaded it, but was so repulsed by his Slavic accent and amateurish presentation, that I probably never watched more than the first minute of it before. But you're right ....


At 8 minutes 17 into the video, there, plain as day is one of my wrist shots of a 7A38-6060 SAA071J. Indeed, from 8:00 onwards, there are 5 more of my photos: 7A38-7290; 7A38-7010, 7A38-7029 Franken and stainless 7A38-7020, etc. To add insult to injury, he repeats the sequences of my photos (without the 7A38-6060) @ 8:42 and again @ 11:44 ! As you may have gathered, this sort of unauthorised and uncredited use of my copyright photos, which happens all too frequently, annoys me intensely, so I've just submitted a takedown request. It remains to be seen how YouTube react.

5 of those 6 photos (the wrist shots) were lifted from the (then current) old forum's The One and Only WRUW thread. I'm not about to wade through all 90 pages of it to locate them, but I'll guarantee you they'll be in there somewhere.

Rather more recently, I had actually posted another photo of one of my 7A38-6060's in this new forum's WRUW thread:

Seiko7A38 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:05 am Wearing this mint 7A38-6060 SAA071J (fitted with a cheap Cousins silicone strap) on this sunny blue SATurday morning.

rsz_p1710008-crop.jpg (244.82 KiB) Viewed 10720 times

That post also included a link to the old archived forum's 7A38-6060 SAA071J model specific thread.

I count myself fortunate that my collection includes 4 decent examples of both the 7A38-6060 SAA071J and its 'evil twin' black chrome coated sibling, the 7A38-6070 SAA073J. Here's another photo I took that same weekend of the best pairs:


Sadly none of the examples that I've purchased over the years came fitted with an original Seiko p/n ZPA22D perforated leather strap. For expediency's sake (viz. lack of any better solution), those 4 are all on Cousins' cheap silicone rubber.

Thanks for replying, providing the answer and photos. I did locate your old forum post with the catalogue image of the original ZPA22D strap along with your explanation of the problem in finding a 23 mm strap to fit the 18 mm lug width.

Seiko7A38 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 8:16 amThanks for the heads up, Jim. .... I've just submitted a takedown request. It remains to be seen how YouTube react.

Thank you again, in turn for the 'heads up' Jim.
YouTube agreed with my justified complaint of copyright infringement and the offending video has since been removed.

You’re welcome. I’m glad you got the action you were seeking.

I can’t imagine anyone being so brazen, especially since he embedded so many of them, so my first assumption was he probably was one of your forum acquaintances who had received your approval.

Hello, I am EDC Gunner the creator of that video. I apologize for using your photos in my amateurish video. I am just a watch enthusiasts and I am sorry if my accent offends you. I did took the photos to illustrate the audience some other fantastic models out there. I meant no harm but I do understand that I used photos that do not belong to me. Simple comment or a message and I would remove the video myself. Now I am hurt by YouTube with this takedown and my existence is in jeopardy as I no longer work since the pandemic hit. YouTube is my source of income for the time being. I would like to offer a sincere apology!

Thank you for the apology, Ferid. However, as far as I'm concerned, the takedown by YouTube will remain indefinitely. Regarding your offer to delete the video yourself; that will achieve nothing. The copyright strike still applies. I suggest you may want to read up on the implications, particularly as your account has recently been terminated once already.

I am aware but if you retract the strike or remove the the claim and once I am cleared, I will delete it manually. Please I am urging you to help me out here. I am in the wrong but if you can be a bigger man and retract it I will be grateful. I do not want to bring my family into this but I am feeding a baby here in these rough times and every little bit helps.

Ferid. As you can see, I have deleted your subsequent second whingeing post. My stance regarding the takedown of your original 7A38 YouTube video for breach of copyright remains firmly the same. Yesterday, I spent (wasted) an hour or so browsing your channel and it soon became very apparent that your pathetic pleas of poverty are utterly baseless.

Something had me slightly puzzled, since you posted that wrist shot of your 7A38-7190 in the WRUW thread yesterday.
It didn't appear to be the same watch that featured in your original (deleted) YouTube video, which was fitted with a rather naff-looking non-original replacement bracelet. (The photo below is from your Instagram feed, not the video).


I stumbled across another of your older YouTube videos featuring a 7A38-7190, which turned out to be this other watch.


I did actually watch this one all the way though, to see if you'd made the same mistake of embedding any of my photos. Between approx. 0:33 and 1:18 you have indeed again included a variety of images (consisting of 7Axx movements and 7A28-7020 SPR007J 'James Bond'), some of which I suspect were lifted from posts on my old forum, but luckily for you, none of them are my own photos, that I could legitimately lay copyright claim to. However @ 1:58 I spotted a familiar photo of somebody else's 7A38-7190.


It is the first photo of his 7A38-7190, from the Fratello #TBT Seiko 7A38 article, penned by Michael Stockton in August 2015. I strongly suspect that, given your lackadaisical approach, you didn't bother asking permission to use that photo either. If I'm correct in my assumption, your indiscriminate theft (there really is no other word for it) and uncredited use of other people's copyright images, is likely to earn you another YouTube copyright strike in the very near future.

Belated edit: Checking the YouTube link I posted earlier, the video has since been made 'Private' (effectively hidden).

YouTube (owned by Google) uses a complex algorithm to ascertain user's interests and thus automatically presents the viewer with new videos. I can't say that I'd given any more thought to EDC Gunner, but it appears that the 'takedown timeout' which was allegedly 'hurting' him so badly, has long since ended. Yesterday evening a new video he'd uploaded two days ago came up in my feed. It features a two-tone Rolex Submariner Ceramic 116613. See also this video, that he uploaded on 23rd August: Collection Update! I upgraded My Rolex Submariner which confirms his account's streaming restriction indeed lasted only 7 days (per above). Remember his earlier feigned, frankly pathetic, pleas of poverty ?

edcgunner wrote: ↑Tue Aug 17, 2021 9:58 amI do not want to bring my family into this but I am feeding a baby here in these rough times and every little bit helps.

I thought I'd check to see whether my takedown request of his Seiko 7A38 video was still in force. It was, but my search returned another of his earlier amateurish efforts from three years ago, featuring his Cartier Ferrari Formula Cal. 531.


The 'borrowed' wording of his caption instantly looked remarkably familiar. At which point, the Red Mist descended.


It's an almost verbatim rip-off of my opening post from the old forum's Cartier Ferrari Formula 'Red Mist' thread ! Ferid's heavily accented voiceover rambles on, in his typically disorganised manner, for nearly 14 minutes. I did manage to hold down my breakfast long enough to watch it all the way through this morning - but only to determine whether there was sufficient grounds to submit another takedown request, on the basis of copyright infringement. Other than the wording of his caption and a couple of 'borrowed' movement photos, which unfortunately I couldn't identify, with absolute certainty, as being my own images. His own words @ 1:51: 'I won't show you, but I will insert a photo maybe'.


There wasn't sufficient justification. Perhaps the saving grace is that he had actually included a link to this website.

Belated Update: After some deliberation I left a sarcastic, but factual comment on the video:

Caption is an almost verbatim rip-off of the text of a post I made on my forum !!!

I note with mild satisfaction that Ferid has wisely decided to edit the original caption, removing my 'borrowed' verbiage.