Benchmade does not condone the Ganzo rip off of the Axis lock!

Status
Not open for further replies.
bld522 said:
People who buy counterfeits don't care about blatant misinformation. They're being duped, don't you get it? I mean, If you could look at knife that contains an Axis lock and discern just by looking at it whether the lock is genuine or fake, then maybe you'd be on to something. Otherwise, your information may be accurate, but it's useless to someone who got duped.

There are SAFE places to buy knives and UNSAFE places to buy knives. Buy knives from SAFE places and the question of whether their Axis locks are genuine is moot.
Click to expand...

You are talking about a different issue than what this thread is about
 
No. I'd suggest the only thing that will keep people from being duped is to buy knives exclusively from SAFE places. No amount of information in the world is a substitute for that.

Any knife can be counterfeited. And counterfeiters are capable of producing counterfeits that are indistinguishable from originals by other than the manufacturers of the originals. Those are the REAL facts. The rest is merely narrative and normally little more than an appeal to morality.

Our mission should be to try to protect people who want to be protected. Those who buy knockoffs with Axis-locks buy them on purpose. They know they're not buying real Benchmades and they neither need nor want our protection. Good luck getting them to change their minds.
 
Last edited:
bld522 said:
No. I'd suggest the only thing that will keep people from being duped is to buy knives exclusively from SAFE places. No amount of information in the world is a substitute for that.

Any knife can be counterfeited. And counterfeiters are capable of producing counterfeits that are indistinguishable from originals by other than the manufacturers of the originals. Those are the REAL facts. The rest is merely narrative and normally little more than an appeal to morality.

Our mission should be to try to protect people who want to be protected. Those who buy knockoffs with Axis-locks buy them on purpose. They neither need nor want our protection. Good luck getting them to change their minds.
Click to expand...

Sorry but yes. did you even read any of the posts I made? I'm not talking about counterfeiting to deceive based on looks or trademarks. There are plenty of threads about that but that is not the subject matter of this thread. You can keep talking about it as if it is the subject but it is not.

I am correcting blatant misinformation spread in multiple places on this forum. Duane Sanders said BM was okay with Ganzo using their axis lock. He said there is enough of a difference in the lock that BM was fine with it. He also said Ganzo calls it the axle lock. All of this information is not correct and can be used to justify supporting Ganzo by purchasing knives with a stolen locking mechanism design. People deserve to know the truth about what they are purchasing.

Continuing to try to draw the conversation to your larger argument about counterfeiting is distracting from the point of this thread. Keep at it if you want but it looks a little silly.
 
Why don't we just call what stealing anyone's ideas are - 'mind rape.' If you don't know how to make money off your own ideas, just steal someone's intellectual property, and you're golden? Pathetic. "I weep for humanity." These people need some scourge for their actions. In this instance, thanks for being that vessel, craytab.

I used to flip a lot of watches; but I've moved on. 99% of the people who have a fake, know exactly what they have. I've heard every lie/excuse in the book. It's these type of threads and info that will help stop all this from happening. @fakewatchbusta & @rolexenforcer changed the game of fake watches. I know guys with millions that will still have 50-70% of their watches fake and then the rest are real. They absolutely go off the fact that they their monetary status and/or that they're leasing some "super cars," and no one would question if their watch is real. Some of the most broke people I know drive "super cars." Like one pay check away from bankruptcy.

In regards to Benchmade's patent, what will all the examples of Benchmade's Axis Lock be called? Homages? So laaaaaammmmmmmeeeeee! Moreover, what happens when someone is duped or stupid enough to buy one and it fails in an emergency scenario or during use? A life dies, the user is hurt badly, and/or etc., however, I'm sure one can see how bad this could turn out.

I hear a lot of people talking about Benchmades failing; my first thought always is, where did they get it? I've used several for over 5 tours, that weren't meant for the abuse I gave it, and never had one fail. I killed several, but never failure.
 
bld522 said:
No. I'd suggest the only thing that will keep people from being duped is to buy knives exclusively from SAFE places. No amount of information in the world is a substitute for that.

Our mission should be to try to protect people who want to be protected. Those who buy knockoffs with Axis-locks buy them on purpose. They know they're not buying real Benchmades and they neither need nor want our protection. Good luck getting them to change their minds.
Click to expand...

Right on! There's a reason why there's ADs. I think not only should we protect, but we should call out anyone who steals. I don't care which end you're on - the forger or buyer - they should be called out. Even if it happens a trillion times a day, those of us with ethics, should stand up.
 
bld522 said:
Do you seriously believe that if we discern truth from bs we will stand a chance against the REAL counterfeiters? Hmmmm.
Click to expand...

Not really, but when I'm not a pessimist I tend to be an optimist.

At least we won't be fooled by that new Sebenza Flipper! :eek:
 
"As for Axis lock and people making it. We do not license it and do not grant permission for factories or custom knife makers to make the mechanism In Their products. They are actually doing it illegally and we have Pursued a few of them. It is also important to mention That some people and brands make something That look similar but is actually not infringing on our patent."
Click to expand...

What they sent me.

Observe they do go after companies that do copy. Also note they don't care about ones that look similar. Maybe the hollow stop pins and pivot pins are enough difference if you think they are exact copies of patented materials.

Nothing in their email states they condone actual copies of their axis lock.

You need to get your story straight. I see no difference in your email response or mine. You will have to give more specific information. Specifically why they do not pursue Ganzo, but have others. That's a little more credible in my opinion.

Whatever your trying to prove, keep trying. You might get the facts straight if you do.
 
Duane Sanders said:
"As for Axis lock and people making it. We do not license it and do not grant permission for factories or custom knife makers to make the mechanism In Their products. They are actually doing it illegally and we have Pursued a few of them. It is also important to mention That some people and brands make something That look similar but is actually not infringing on our patent."

What they sent me.

Observe they do go after companies that do copy. Also note they don't care about ones that look similar. Maybe the hollow stop pins and pivot pins are enough difference if you think they are exact copies of patented materials.

Nothing in their email states they condone actual copies of their axis lock.

You need to get your story straight. I see no difference in your email response or mine. You will have to give more specific information. Specifically why they do not pursue Ganzo, but have others. That's a little more credible in my opinion.

Whatever your trying to prove, keep trying. You might get the facts straight if you do.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious Duane.

Where exactly in their statement to you do they say they are fine with Ganzo's version of their Axis lock? Point it out.

Cuz.....in their response to me they say explicitly that they do not condone what Ganzo is doing. They even go so far as to apologize to me for the miss information I was given (you information).

You also say repeatedly that Ganzo calls their Axis lock a different name but when you go to their website they in fact call it the Axis lock. What give there Duane?

I don't know why you are spreading this misinformation. Do you just like to lie? Are you trolling? Or are a very confused person? I don't know and I don't care. The facts are what they are and you need to stop spreading misinformation that legitimizes patent theft.
 
Duane Sanders said:
What they sent me.

Observe they do go after companies that do copy. Also note they don't care about ones that look similar. Maybe the hollow stop pins and pivot pins are enough difference if you think they are exact copies of patented materials.

Nothing in their email states they condone actual copies of their axis lock.

You need to get your story straight. I see no difference in your email response or mine. You will have to give more specific information. Specifically why they do not pursue Ganzo, but have others. That's a little more credible in my opinion.

Whatever your trying to prove, keep trying. You might get the facts straight if you do.
Click to expand...

I bet the "similar but not infringing" that BM mentions is the lock in the Spyderco Manix 2 and Sage 2. Extending that statement to Ganzo is groundless. Its all academic anyway as BM has no grounds to go after Ganzo being that patents are national, not global.
 
Yalius said:
Unfortunately, those extended patents are listed with a priority date of 1996. So no, they don't actually extend the term of the patent. 2016 is it. The date granted or published doesn't extend the term from the priority date. RE patents are re-examined, not new patents. They just clarify the scope or extent of the patent.
Click to expand...

I've seen patent attorneys do some pretty amazing things to essentially extend a patent for perpetuity. It may be as simple as describing a new intended use for a knife bearing an Axis lock. Patent law is rarely as simple as it appears...IF you have the funds and will to maintain it. A good patent attorney will structure an initial patent application in such a way to leave the door open for an extension and re-application with refinement or enhanced purpose.
 
Hackenslash said:
I've seen patent attorneys do some pretty amazing things to essentially extend a patent for perpetuity. It may be as simple as describing a new intended use for a knife bearing an Axis lock. Patent law is rarely as simple as it appears...IF you have the funds and will to maintain it. A good patent attorney will structure an initial patent application in such a way to leave the door open for an extension and re-application with refinement or enhanced purpose.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but if that were the case, the new patent would include a new priority date to indicate the new term. Re-filing, amending, or re-examining a patent and leaving the priority date the same as the original one is pretty much dispositive regarding the term of the patent. And if a new patent were filed with modifications to the axis lock to extend the patent date, the original, unmodified design would not be covered by the newer patent.
 
Yalius said:
Possibly, but if that were the case, the new patent would include a new priority date to indicate the new term. Re-filing, amending, or re-examining a patent and leaving the priority date the same as the original one is pretty much dispositive regarding the term of the patent.
Click to expand...

I guess we'll know the patent is truly expired when we see the new Kershaw "Axe", Axis Lock Assisted Flipper in 14C28N Drop Point with G10 scales land at Blade HQ :)

I think I just designed the next Kershaw...
 
Yalius said:
Possibly, but if that were the case, the new patent would include a new priority date to indicate the new term. Re-filing, amending, or re-examining a patent and leaving the priority date the same as the original one is pretty much dispositive regarding the term of the patent. And if a new patent were filed with modifications to the axis lock to extend the patent date, the original, unmodified design would not be covered by the newer patent.
Click to expand...

Can you please provide some evidence that states the priority date is the date from which the protection starts? Everything I am reading says priority date in the case of the Axis lock simply links the patents together. It would make little sense for Mchenry & Williams to file multiple patents to extend their protection if no matter what, the priority date was the date the protection started from and could not be extended. Please explain this.
 
Yalius said:
Unfortunately, those extended patents are listed with a priority date of 1996. So no, they don't actually extend the term of the patent. 2016 is it. The date granted or published doesn't extend the term from the priority date. RE patents are re-examined, not new patents. They just clarify the scope or extent of the patent.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that the priority date is the limiting date?
 
Here you go.

http://community.freepatentsonline.com/wiki/when-does-a-patent-expire

"In patent law, when a priority is validly claimed, the date of filing of the first application, called the priority date, is considered to be the effective date of filing for the examination of novelty and inventive step or non-obviousness for the subsequent application claiming the priority of the first application. In other words, the prior art which is taken into account for examining the novelty and inventive step or non-obviousness of the invention claimed in the subsequent application would not be everything made available to the public before the filing date (of the subsequent application) but everything made available to the public before the priority date, i.e. the date of filing of the first application."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_right

US patents are effective from the date of filing, not date granted; the priority date is the legal date of filing.
 
Personally I see no ethical dilemma whatsoever about functional low-cost replicas, they aren't exactly flooding the market, they're competing with $10-$30 knives and not the $75-$300 knives real Benchmades are judged against, it's not even Benchmade's design, the lock is now pushing twenty years old, and the Ganzos I've seen really do stand up to other lower cost folders.

I greatly appreciate having the option to buy from a line of knives that use the lock I am most comfortable with and have obvious cost-cutting measures that I am ok with, such as the unmilled liners, heavy omega springs, sometimes sharp jimping, and lack of Loctite.

I like that a lot more than most of what's available from 'American' manufacturers in that price range. Most of the time it's outsourced if it's under a hundred bucks anyway, so what's the point in nutfluffing over whether someone buys a replica of a knife that's still in production?

I'll take one of a few Ganzos over a Gerber, CRKT, or even a Cold Steel any day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top