Are they clones/ knock offs?

[bodog]

Guess you don't understand how patents and the patent process work.

https://www.uspto.gov/patents-getting-started/general-information-concerning-patents#heading-3

I have a decent understanding of IP protection. That doesn't address the moral or ethical arguments being presented.

 

[craytab]

I just wanted to say that normally counterfeiting inexpensive knives makes no sense, but in this case it makes total sense.
They're giving people something the original knives don't, which is the large variety of color choices without having to get custom scales or a dealer exclusive.

Counterfeiting isn't good , but maybe sog and Ontario should release some more colors.

That is one I've never heard before. Justifying counterfeits because of color choice!

 

[JuJu-]

Are you going to say anything substantial or ad hominem attacks only?

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/1/Ad_Hominem_Abusive

Just replying to your post. I guess I should ask do you understand how US patents work?

I askEd you a question because of the " information" that you presented in your post was very misinformed.

If KAI was honest they'd call the sub-frame lock a Reeve Integral Lock with material covering a portion of a large lock bar cutout. But instead they patented it as a completely new concept. And that's just one thing, and a small one at that.

KAI has every right to name their patent sub frame lock on the folders that have it. The US Patent office thinks so too. Why else would they have been awarded it? What you perceive as theft from KAI because they don't say reeve integral lock, is just that; a misinformed perception.

Nice link. Maybe you should try out the 1776 from Kershaw.

 

[bodog]

Just replying to your post. I guess I should ask do you understand how US patents work?

I askEd you a question because of the " information" that you presented in your post was very misinformed.




KAI has every right to name their patent sub frame lock on the folders that have it. The US Patent office thinks so too. Why else would they have been awarded it? What you perceive as theft from KAI because they don't say reeve integral lock, is just that; a misinformed perception.

Nice link. Maybe you should try out the 1776 from Kershaw.

They can call it whatever they want, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something other than what I said. A rose by any other name...

Anyway, I guess you chose not to hear me when I said there are very few original products out there. They're all ripped off from someone else and improved or made for a lower cost or have some added bells and whistles. None of this is new and the only thing I'm trying to bring up is that someone shouldn't be attacked, like PurpleEDC? said when someone buys a ganzo with an axis lock but people think a shirogorov is more than acceptable, it's desirable.

Let he has has no sin cast the first stone and all that. I'm pretty sure all of us have copies or generic products of something. If you have gone out of your way to ensure you don't, them preach on. Otherwise, live and let live.

 

[Seneca18]

Even if they are fakes, they're still made in China so what's the difference ?

Both the Ontario and SOG are made in Taiwan I believe. I have never seen an orange Twitch ii so i'm sure they are fake.

 

[Hickory n steel]

That is one I've never heard before. Justifying counterfeits because of color choice!

I'm not justifying them at all. I'm saying that if sog or Ontario start getting calls from people looking for these other colors they might think about offering these colors themselves.

I'm not a fan of assisted openers, but could really be tempted by a blaze orange sog twitch 2.


The counterfeits aren't a good thing, but at least something good may result.

 

[Scurvy092]

Lot of armchair patent attorney work going on in here.

Carry on.

 

[PURPLEDC]

They can call it whatever they want, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something other than what I said. A rose by any other name...

Anyway, I guess you chose not to hear me when I said there are very few original products out there. They're all ripped off from someone else and improved or made for a lower cost or have some added bells and whistles. None of this is new and the only thing I'm trying to bring up is that someone shouldn't be attacked, like PurpleEDC? said when someone buys a ganzo with an axis lock but people think a shirogorov is more than acceptable, it's desirable.

Let he has has no sin cast the first stone and all that. I'm pretty sure all of us have copies or generic products of something. If you have gone out of your way to ensure you don't, them preach on. Otherwise, live and let live.

You do realize that the sub-frame lock is comprised of two separate pieces bolted together right? The lock is an additional piece and is not integral to the knife frame or scale. But it is worth noting that Dmitry Sinkevich Did the exact same thing as the subframe lock in 2008. Dmitry himself was amazed at the similarities of the 0777 and the subframe lock to his work and lock design. It eventually led to a collaboration. So apparently all is kosher between them.

 

[craytab]

They can call it whatever they want, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something other than what I said. A rose by any other name...

Anyway, I guess you chose not to hear me when I said there are very few original products out there. They're all ripped off from someone else and improved or made for a lower cost or have some added bells and whistles. None of this is new and the only thing I'm trying to bring up is that someone shouldn't be attacked, like PurpleEDC? said when someone buys a ganzo with an axis lock but people think a shirogorov is more than acceptable, it's desirable.

Let he has has no sin cast the first stone and all that. I'm pretty sure all of us have copies or generic products of something. If you have gone out of your way to ensure you don't, them preach on. Otherwise, live and let live.

Again, knife forum. General Knife Discussion. We talk about knives here. We can not want counterfeits in our hobby no matter what other industries do.

Both the Ontario and SOG are made in Taiwan I believe. I have never seen an orange Twitch ii so i'm sure they are fake.

I thought the Seal pup was made in Taiwan. The 2 I have are. Went and checked and it is listed as China on SOGs website. They must have switched it recently. The Twitch is still listed as assembled in the USA.

 

[craytab]

You do realize that the sub-frame lock is comprised of two separate pieces bolted together right? The lock is an additional piece and is not integral to the knife frame or scale.

Let's not get bogged down with facts or accurate definitions of things.

 

[kneedeep]

I have a decent understanding of IP protection. That doesn't address the moral or ethical arguments being presented.

No, but it does address your misrepresentation of what constitutes a valid patent and what differentiation is necessary to obtain a patent.

 

[bodog]

No, but it does address your misrepresentation of what constitutes a valid patent and what differentiation is necessary to obtain a patent.

What? I never said there were any invalid patents. Where did you see that? I also never delved into what is needed to obtain a patent. Where do you get either of those ideas from anything I said? Are you just making stuff up to protect a brand you like or something? Do you believe normal business practices don't apply to a company you like? I don't get it man. You've ignored 3/4 of what I said, cherry picked a couple of statements, and created a false argument. And for what? Because a specific couple of companies were mentioned?

 

[kneedeep]

They can call it whatever they want, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something other than what I said. A rose by any other name...

Anyway, I guess you chose not to hear me when I said there are very few original products out there. They're all ripped off from someone else and improved or made for a lower cost or have some added bells and whistles. None of this is new and the only thing I'm trying to bring up is that someone shouldn't be attacked, like PurpleEDC? said when someone buys a ganzo with an axis lock but people think a shirogorov is more than acceptable, it's desirable.

Let he has has no sin cast the first stone and all that. I'm pretty sure all of us have copies or generic products of something. If you have gone out of your way to ensure you don't, them preach on. Otherwise, live and let live.

I think it has been pointed out this thread and elsewhere, private forum freedom of speech doesn't really apply here and since many knifemakers and manufacturers are paying to represent themselves here, condoning clones, copies, knock-offs, and counterfeits openly is a bit inappropriate.

 

[bodog]

I think it has been pointed out this thread and elsewhere, private forum freedom of speech doesn't really apply here and since many knifemakers and manufacturers are paying to represent themselves here, condoning clones, copies, knock-offs, and counterfeits openly is a bit inappropriate.

Then there won't be much to talk about on a knife forum since there are extremely few new ideas in a simple tool like a knife. If any and every company that copied some idea or another from another company were barred from being talked about, that'd leave all of about 0 companies left since there's no company on the market right now that actually created a piece of steel with a sharpened edge. But seriously, copying is commonplace. IP theft, a criminal action, is a far cry from simple design copying that is so commonplace that I guess you've learned to overlook it.

 

[kneedeep]

Then there won't be much to talk about on a knife forum since there are extremely few new ideas in a simple tool like a knife.

Well then, unless you are replacing one you wore out, I guess there is no point in buying more knives since they are pretty much all the same thing. Must be a terribly dull hobby for you.

Apologies to the OP, for the derailment of the thread, though this is inevitable for the topic.

 

[Hackenslash]

Then there won't be much to talk about on a knife forum since there are extremely few new ideas in a simple tool like a knife. If any and every company that copied some idea or another from another company were barred from being talked about, that'd leave all of about 0 companies left since there's no company on the market right now that actually created a piece of steel with a sharpened edge. But seriously, copying is commonplace. IP theft, a criminal action, is a far cry from simple design copying that is so commonplace that I guess you've learned to overlook it.

At the beginning of your posts in this thread, you accused KAI of theft of the RIV by patenting of the Sub-Frame. That statement was so incorrect from a standpoint of what IS a patentable device, it invalidates your following arguments. You need to fix that before you can be taken serious in a conceptual discussion. I tried to gently call you out on that error but you missed what I said.

I think you have a seed of a valid argument (Shiro vs. ganzo in ripping off the Axis Lock, Reate ripping off the LionSteel Rotolock...there are lots of examples). I'd love to see it discussed without bad info to cover up the real issue.

I have a theory as to why Shiro, Reate et.al. get by but we can't even go there yet.

 

[bodog]

At the beginning of your posts in this thread, you accused KAI of theft of the RIV by patenting of the Sub-Frame. That statement was so incorrect from a standpoint of what IS a patentable device, it invalidates your following arguments. You need to fix that before you can be taken serious in a conceptual discussion. I tried to gently call you out on that error but you missed what I said.

I think you have a seed of a valid argument (Shiro vs. ganzo in ripping off the Axis Lock, Reate ripping off the LionSteel Rotolock...there are lots of examples). I'd love to see it discussed without bad info to cover up the real issue.

I have a theory as to why Shiro, Reate et.al. get by but we can't even go there yet.

No, I said they straight up stole certain things. The RIL thing, if you go back and look, is something small and I said it was just a design copy and modification of an RIL with just enough differences to call it something new. It's not. It's just a rip off of someone else's design. Not illegal and I might just argue not unethical. Just business. If you look at all my posts I say the same thing over and over. People have a hard time distinguishing, though, between real life and their ideals. This being a perfect example. ZT ripping off the idea of the RIL, lengthening the lockbar cutout, and throwing a slab of carbon fiber or G10 on top of that scale is easy, yet just enough to say it's theirs and no one else's even though the ACTUAL concept belongs to someone else. And what I said is that KAI straight up stole some designs and patented them, but that the RIL issue isn't really one of them, but close, and them going after microtech is hypocritical because the ACTUAL idea belongs to Reeve. All ZT did is add some flair. But again, and please read carefully, they followed the law and used the law to benefit themselves. That's business and your idea of right or wrong doesn't matter at all except to say that you'll buy it or you won't. Same goes for all the rest. I'm not saying anything is right or wrong necessarily, I'm saying it's legal or not and YOUR OWN perceptions dictate whether or not you'll buy a product. But, and here's where I'm making a stand, people will absolutely attack kevin john knives for blatantly ripping something off but shirogorov or microtech doing it is ok (or charmin vs cottonelle or equate vs Tylenol or model A vs Toyota camry). I'm just arguing against the hypocrisy. They're all ripoffs of someone else. As long as someone follows the law then anything else is just purely academic. Getting worked up about it is trite.

Now when you get to dumping (look up anti-dumping laws) or actual IP crimes with current and valid patents and trademarks being infringed, or human rights violations, or anything else ACTUALLY and DEFINITIVELY immoral, then it's less about academics and more about taking action.

I've tried to take action in a real and tangible way by ACTUALLY enforcing IP laws. It sucked and was boring. But I did it for awhile. All this to say that your personal opinions don't matter at all. All of this thread could have been summed up by a bunch of people saying they'd buy the counterfeit knives in the OP or not. Or they'd report the violations or not. Or if they found they accidentally bought counterfeit knives they'd turn them into the authorities or not. Anything else doesn't really matter.

And copying non-protected designs? Just don't be hypocritical. If it's not protected and you don't agree with it being copied, then don't buy it. That's fine. But the world will move on and march forward without you.

 

[kneedeep]

No, I said they straight up stole certain things. The RIL thing, if you go back and look, is something small and I said it was just a design copy and modification of an RIL with just enough differences to call it something new. It's not. It's just a rip off of someone else's design. Not illegal and I might just argue not unethical. Just business. If you look at all my posts I say the same thing over and over. People have a hard time distinguishing, though, between real life and their ideals. This being a perfect example. ZT ripping off the idea of the RIL, lengthening the lockbar cutout, and throwing a slab of carbon fiber or G10 on top of that scale is easy, yet just enough to say it's theirs and no one else's even though the ACTUAL concept belongs to someone else. And what I said is that KAI straight up stole some designs and patented them, but that the RIL issue isn't really one of them, but close, and them going after microtech is hypocritical because the ACTUAL idea belongs to Reeve. All ZT did is add some flair. But again, and please read carefully, they followed the law and used the law to benefit themselves. That's business and your idea of right or wrong doesn't matter at all except to say that you'll buy it or you won't. Same goes for all the rest. I'm not saying anything is right or wrong necessarily, I'm saying it's legal or not and YOUR OWN perceptions dictate whether or not you'll buy a product. But, and here's where I'm making a stand, people will absolutely attack kevin john knives for blatantly ripping something off but shirogorov or microtech doing it is ok. I'm just arguing against the hypocrisy.

Um, hello, as has been pointed out, on the subframe lock, the lock bar is a separate piece. Not a cosmetic piece slapped on as you keep saying. Functionality and end result is similar, but structurally they are achieved in a completely different way. Since it was granted a patent, the patent office clearly is capable (unlike you) of differentiating the two. If you had read any of the information at the link I provided, you would know that one of the requirements for granting a patent on something that YOU consider a copy is -

In order for an invention to be patentable it must be new as defined in the patent law, which provides that an invention cannot be patented if:
“(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention” or
“(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued [by the U.S.] or in an application for patent published or deemed published [by the U.S.], in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”

And

"Even if the subject matter sought to be patented is not exactly shown by the prior art, and involves one or more differences over the most nearly similar thing already known, a patent may still be refused if the differences would be obvious. The subject matter sought to be patented must be sufficiently different from what has been used or described before that it may be said to be non-obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention. For example, the substitution of one color for another, or changes in size, are ordinarily not patentable."

So, not only must it be different enough, the differences must not be obvious to a layperson in that field.

Just because something accomplishes the same thing does not mean that it is a copy. The patent office clearly believes that accomplishing the same thing through a different means is patent worthy.

Since the sub-frame lock is patented and has been successfully enforced it is clearly not a copy of something else. Perhaps evolution would be term acceptable to you?

Not arguing about your comments about discrimination with regards to where knock-offs and IP theft originate, just trying to correct your blatantly wrong information regarding patents in general and the one you keep coming back to specifically.

 

[mqqn]

Actually, Kai USA LTD solved some of the inherent problems with the RIL by creating the sub-frame lock.

They also improved the breed with the addition of a lockbar insert, as did Spyderco on some of their models.

I suppose all knives are rip-offs of knapped obsidian? That is just as absurd, in my opinion, as is thinking that all designs are "rip-offs" of other designs.

When another company blatantly copies the style and function of another brand, particularly a patented feature, that is morally lacking.

All good though, at least we are discussing knives!

best

mqqn

 

[bodog]

Um, hello, as has been pointed out, on the subframe lock, the lock bar is a separate piece. Not a cosmetic piece slapped on as you keep saying. Functionality and end result is similar, but structurally they are achieved in a completely different way. Since it was granted a patent, the patent office clearly is capable (unlike you) of differentiating the two. If you had read any of the information at the link I provided, you would know that one of the requirements for granting a patent on something that YOU consider a copy is -



And



So, not only must it be different enough, the differences must not be obvious to a layperson in that field.

Just because something accomplishes the same thing does not mean that it is a copy. The patent office clearly believes that accomplishing the same thing through a different means is patent worthy.

Since the sub-frame lock is patented and has been successfully enforced it is clearly not a copy of something else. Perhaps evolution would be term acceptable to you?

Not arguing about your comments about discrimination with regards to where knock-offs and IP theft originate, just trying to correct your blatantly wrong information regarding patents in general and the one you keep coming back to specifically.

Ugh, I had a long post typed up but things didn't work out. I'll shorten it to...

I like ZT, I carried one today. I find it to be a really good knife for the money I paid for it. I wish they'd have given credit by calling their framelock what it actually is, an unprotected RIL, but whatever. It's still a good knife and it wasn't truly unethically produced. The company that made it has some shady, albeit legal, dealings, but which business doesn't? In the knife world I think Spyderco doesn't. But what I feel about it doesn't matter. I'm just a consumer. Either I can deal with what I buy or I can't. But I'm not a hypocrite about it, either. That's the essence of my stance in this whole thing. I believe there are a lot of hypocritical people popping up. Pull the stick from your own eye first (Matthew 7:5)...

"You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will see clearly enough to remove the speck from your brother's eye"