Axis Lock and its Use

[Petunia D. Feeble]

We've all gotten accustomed to seeing threads posted about Ganzos or some some other nameless brand of Chinese knife and then the deluge of shame that follows.

In the case of clones or counterfeits, the sort that genuinely try to pass themselves off as a Spyderco, Benchmade, etc., there is no excuse. It's just plain wrong.

For those that are just similar in shape or appearance though the morality issue is a little more vague. Why is it Ok for Schrade to copy a Buck 110? It's not an exact copy and its not trying to pose as a 110. It says Schrade on it and has minor differences. More inspired by than copied... Is the same not true for the Sanrenmu 710?

I don't know. I don't buy them because the steel is too soft and the quality sucks. Plus, I know who makes Spydercos. I know who makes Benchmades. They have names and faces that I can recognize. Families that pay the same taxes I do. I'd rather give them the cash.

My question though isn't about the politics of knives that are "inspired by", but about a subject that always comes up in those threads: the theft of the axis lock. Is it still?

Michael Walker adapted the liner lock from a 19th century device with the addition of the stop pin and the detent ball. It's fair game for anyone now.

Chris Reeve adapted the liner lock by combining it with the frame of the knife creating the integral or the frame lock as we know it now. Again, fair game these days.

At what point does the axis lock become fair game? It's just how industry works. Someone invents something and patents it. They own it for a while and hopefully reap the rewards of their creation. Then it becomes fair game for others.

Is the axis lock immune to this timeframe for some reason? Has that legal time limit elapsed? I'm asking out of curiosity as I genuinely don't know. I'm fairly certain I read that the patent expired, but am also pretty sure that if Steel Will or Reate came out with a new axis model the majority here would rake them over the coals for it.

 

[GatorMedic]

From what has been said on these forums it seems the axis lock patent ended this year or sometime recently. That makes it legally fair game to anyone. Not sure why there would be a whole bunch of people upset by its use in other brands now that its patent is expired. What makes you think there would be such a backlash on these forums about it?

 

[Hackenslash]

This is a difficult and polarizing topic. I think by focusing on the Axis lock, however, you've made it a little easier to discuss.

To the best of my understanding the McHenry and Williams/Benchmade Axis Lock is currently public domain. The most recent patents and filings look like they expired about a year ago. Now, nobody here is a patent attorney so there can be no official opinion. In fact the "official opinion" will happen if a new, unauthorized use is taken to court. But...for grins and giggles, let's assume that the Axis Lock is no longer intellectual property or a license-able design feature.

This doesn't change a thing for those who've used it without authorization while in a protected state. Ganzo has literally built a knife identity and product line using copied designs offered with unlicensed Axis Locks for years. They, in my opinion are still scum sucking puss wheezing reeking thieves. There is a path of redemption, IMO, for Ganzo but I see them in no hurry to follow it.

On the bright side, I'd be totally all over a ZT Hinderer with an Axis Lock!...or a PM2 with an Axis Lock!

 

[SpySmasher]

We don't know for sure if the AXIS lock is still under U.S. patent. The earliest the U.S. patent could have expired was July 2016. If there were any administrative delays, it might have been extended. Other than those, there's no way to extend that patent. Of course, it is possible to get a new patent on an improved version of your original idea (presuming that these improvements are distinguished enough) but in the U.S. it is indeed likely that the original patent has expired and the design is in the public domain. The "AXIS lock," is, of course, a trademark (which doesn't expire) and so would fall into the same category as the Spideyhole: you can make a Spydiehole but you can't call it a "Spydiehole."

Ganzo started building AXIS locks well before their earliest possible expiration dates and are apparently completely unapologetic about it.

I am very much in favor of the idea of a patent. It's a time-tested (the first patents were issued in ancient Greece) way of balancing the rights of creators vs. the public good and spurring innovation. You may quibble over the appropriate term of a patent (is 20 years enough? is it too much?) but I think you have to be a major a-hole to steal from the pockets of creative types acting in good faith and in accordance with local, national and international laws, as essentially every Chinese knifemaker has done at some point, even the ones we "like." To me, Reate is no better than Ganzo.

 

[Hickory n steel]

Im not so sure it would be wrong if a company only just now started to use the axis lock after it's patent has expired , now that it's free game so to speak.
However if a company started using it before it was fair game and has simply continued producing them then of course it's still wrong. They never cared that it was patented, so they probably weren't keeping tabs on it's patented status, and they probably don't know that the patent has expired.

Btw I don't think the Buck 110 is a good example, because we're talking about a locking mechanism and not a specific knife being copied. To use the now made by everyone Lock back mechanism is one thing, but there's only one Buck 110 and anything that's obviously copying or trying to directly compete with the Buck 110 by being extremely similar will always be wrong in my eyes.

 

[madcap_magician]

To me, Reate is no better than Ganzo.

This does depend somewhat on whether the offense is ongoing. I'm not saying just because a company stops ripping off intellectual property one day that the next day all is forgiven, but I am saying that if a company has done this at some point in the past and stops, it shouldn't be held against them forever.

 

[SpySmasher]

This does depend somewhat on whether the offense is ongoing. I'm not saying just because a company stops ripping off intellectual property one day that the next day all is forgiven, but I am saying that if a company has done this at some point in the past and stops, it shouldn't be held against them forever.

I understand and in principle I agree. Certainly, you have to give people the ability and encouragement to change their ways. So maybe I shouldn't have said "no better." The are moving in the right direction.

Still, it bugs me that so many former cloners and counterfeiters are moving unapologetically into a market space where they enjoy the same legal protections that they so blithely ignored just a few years ago.

 

[Danke42]

Didn't both Walker and Reeve leave their work un-patented so that it was open for other makers to use.

On the face of it that may seem contradictory but what they got out of it was widespread acceptance of their ideas to the point of them nearly becoming a standard in the what could be best described as a resistant to change industry and customer base.

One a patent lapses it's fair game you can presume. As of the last purse fight over the axis lock the protection was still in force.

The OP also posits the question re Schrade copying the Buck 110 and I see that as different copying a pattern or lock vs. a specific mechanical feature. As a rule I"dl say that copies of an iconic knife have a higher bar to meet with buyers. At the end of it the industry is very small and I suspect anyone who steps too far into another's territory will find out about it.

 

[jill jackson]

Schrade copied the Buck decades ago, when people didn't really even think about whether it was morally right, or wrong. The older generation that I've talked to about it, have all told me people back then didn't even discuss the issue. You might say the LB7 was "grandfathered in".

 

[Aldebaran]

There are a couple of points to make I think.

First, there is a company that was copying the axis lock, and a whole knife design, then get given total love here; Shirogorov. How they get a pass and others do not is a bit baffling to me.

Second, some here have been outright against the morals of a behavior even if it is legal. It was legal for Ganzo to make their knives in China with any design they wanted, under Chinese law. US or western law does not apply in their country. I am sure that most here (from the USA) would be opposed to being forced to follow the laws in Iran. So should the Chinese not be forced to follow the laws of the USA.

If the morals of the Chinese do not fit with yours, then make a decision. Buy or don't buy from China. It isn't the fault of the manufacturers that they have their laws, it is the fault of the Chinese government. So buying anything from China that you don't consider a copy is the same thing as buying a non-copied knife from a Chinese company. Doing either is supporting the basis under which any copy happens in China. Good luck not buying anything that has ties to China. I also bet most here would not stick to their morals absolutely when they realize they will be without their iPhone, their TV, their car........

Everyone has their line in the sand and some lines are rather blurry.

 

[SpySmasher]

First, there is a company that was copying the axis lock, and a whole knife design, then get given total love here; Shirogorov. How they get a pass and others do not is a bit baffling to me.

Baffles me too. Though I don't use it as an argument to lower the moral bar.

Second, some here have been outright against the morals of a behavior even if it is legal. It was legal for Ganzo to make their knives in China with any design they wanted, under Chinese law. US or western law does not apply in their country. I am sure that most here (from the USA) would be opposed to being forced to follow the laws in Iran. So should the Chinese not be forced to follow the laws of the USA.

No, that's false. The Chinese are signatories to all of the major intellectual property rights treaties since 1980. The fact that you can't enforce it in any practical way doesn't change the other fact that under international treaties to which the Chinese are signatories, these U.S. patents should be protected. This line of bullshit is spread too often by people who are looking to excuse their support of IP theft.

 

[chiral.grolim]

First, there is a company that was copying the axis lock, and a whole knife design, then get given total love here; Shirogorov. How they get a pass and others do not is a bit baffling to me.

Maybe if you read more about the history of Shirogorov, including the history of that clone and their use of the axis-lock, you will find the obvious differences in their story vs the Ganzo example.

As to "Chinese law" vs "American Law", that is a red-herring - those factories producing the copies in China do not care about either one . It is also a false dichotomy to assert, "buy or don't buy from China". Your argument centers on nations and their laws as if all producers in a given nation were copy-cats or innovators. That is absurd. The answer is simple - buy only authentic products, do not buy from or support producers or vendors of counterfeit items. It doesn't matter where it is made, what matters is WHAT is being made. Don't buy a counterfeit car, phone, TV or knife. To whit, don't buy from companies that cheat Americans who must operate under American law, regardless of whether their behavior is legal or acceptable in their own country. Indeed, don't buy from American companies that cheat other American companies, and don't buy from Americans that cheat Chinese companies out of their IP rights. (there was a significant example of this in the knife community not so very long ago)

You brought up Iranian law as a comparison to enforcing US standards on Chinese manufacturers - I presume from this that you consider certain Iranian laws to be unacceptable to American society. What you should have brought up were Chinese laws! And the answer is obvious - why should anyone care what the law is or is not in China with regard to counterfeits? If China had the same laws as the US, would they enforce them on behalf of US companies? Not likely. The issue is not with China, the issue is with counterfeiters themselves. Don't buy from them. That's it, pretty simple really, and you can keep your car, TV, phone, etc. etc. etc.


AND if the axis-lock really is "fair-game" now, you can buy a recently designed and build non-Benchmade knife featuring the lock. No, you still cannot purchase the Ganzo copy as if it is suddenly "OK" now, even when they have been making their counterfeits for years. I cannot foresee a time that Ganzo will EVER be an acceptable company to purchase a product from, but that is just me.

 

[SpySmasher]

As to "Chinese law" vs "American Law", that is a red-herring - those factories producing the copies in China do not care about either one . It is also a false dichotomy to assert, "buy or don't buy from China". Your argument centers on nations and their laws as if all producers in a given nation were copy-cats or innovators. That is absurd. The answer is simple - buy only authentic products, do not buy from or support producers or vendors of counterfeit items. It doesn't matter where it is made, what matters is WHAT is being made.

Hear, hear.

 

[GermanyChris]

If the patient or trademark expired then everything is OK and I'm a guy that this that patients are inherently wrong and that they are for to long and trademarks that extend patients (looking at you Spyderco and Emerson) are inherently evil.

 

[91bravo]

If the patient or trademark expired then everything is OK and I'm a guy that this that patients are inherently wrong and that they are for to long and trademarks that extend patients (looking at you Spyderco and Emerson) are inherently evil.

If I invented something, I surely wouldn't want anyone else out there to use my invention for economical gain. That's why I would get a patent...

 

[GermanyChris]

If I invented something, I surely wouldn't want anyone else out there to use my invention for economical gain. That's why I would get a patent...

But if patients didn't exist or were severely limited then that wouldn't be an issue. My name is mentioned in quite a few open source projects for code I've contributed I don't get angry that Canonical and Red Hat and others make money off my time and code but I do however lime the fact that my OS is both more stable and functional now that my code is there, and code and open source enable the worlds commerce.

 

[91bravo]

It's not so much that someone else is using my invention, but more of sometimes they make false claims to have invented it in the first place. Sure, if patents never existed we would never have patent problems. But patents do exist....

 

[GermanyChris]

It's not so much that someone else is using my invention, but more of sometimes they make false claims to have invented it in the first place. Sure, if patents never existed we would never have patent problems. But patents do exist....

They do and need to be respected no matter the company cheating or how much we like them

 

[Aldebaran]

Baffles me too. Though I don't use it as an argument to lower the moral bar.

When did I say I was using anything I said to lower morals. I was pointing out a hypocrisy and nothing else. Stop applying motives to e that I have not expressed.

No, that's false. The Chinese are signatories to all of the major intellectual property rights treaties since 1980. The fact that you can't enforce it in any practical way doesn't change the other fact that under international treaties to which the Chinese are signatories, these U.S. patents should be protected. This line of bullshit is spread too often by people who are looking to excuse their support of IP theft.

Are you trying to say that I support IP theft? If so, you keep ignoring things I say against it. I am trying to point out problems with the thin black lines people are drawing and trying to impose on others.

 

[Aldebaran]

To whit, don't buy from companies that cheat Americans who must operate under American law, regardless of whether their behavior is legal or acceptable in their own country. Indeed, don't buy from American companies that cheat other American companies, and don't buy from Americans that cheat Chinese companies out of their IP rights. (there was a significant example of this in the knife community not so very long ago)

You brought up Iranian law as a comparison to enforcing US standards on Chinese manufacturers - I presume from this that you consider certain Iranian laws to be unacceptable to American society. What you should have brought up were Chinese laws! And the answer is obvious - why should anyone care what the law is or is not in China with regard to counterfeits? If China had the same laws as the US, would they enforce them on behalf of US companies? Not likely. The issue is not with China, the issue is with counterfeiters themselves. Don't buy from them. That's it, pretty simple really, and you can keep your car, TV, phone, etc. etc. etc.

With your logic, people should not buy from Spyderco. They support a company in China that were/are making fakes, copies and IP theft, by having knives made for Spyderco.