Benchmade steals the spyderhole

I agree. There's nothing wrong with debates. Though I resent being called names occasionally, I find reasonable debates interesting.

Interesting, but it wasn't patented as a feature for opening a folding knife. The patent was for the ornamental design of the knife.
Click to expand...

The evangelist might accuse you of making lawyer talk, relying on legal specifics to defend idea theft. But nobody in this thread is here to evangelize for Queen and whip up such a defense.

While I can think Spyderco is doing a nice thing by getting permission for specifically asking Emerson, it seems to be difficult to argue that Emerson's idea was truly unique. The question becomes, why does Spyderco ask anyone at all? Do the debates become "Emerson steals from Queen", or more likely, "Cold Steel Steals from Queen", as I recall folks accusing Cold Steel stealing the Wave for their products.
 
WARNING This is what I feel is a good point..lol

If we are talking about the hole as being a mechanism than wouldn't that go the same for lokcing mechanisms? If so who has the lockback patent? Or the linerlock patent? They must be pretty upset at all the people using their idea huh...?
 
The lockback and Linerlock patents have expired. I do not know what happened in the case of the lockback patent, because that was well before my time, but in the case of the Linerlock, reputable companies came to an agreement with Michael Walker before using it in their designs.
 
Yeah, but you have to admit too many companies use both mechanisms to have any of the patents hold up right? Wouldn't that mean that dozens and dozens of knife companies including all of our favorite ones would be in violation? What about the thumbstud? I could go on and on...Inserts, lanyard holes, scroll work, liners, blade shapes, serrations? Who has the rights to these ideas? Everyone uses them...
 
Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Z
 
I'd be surprised if linerlocks and lockbacks were not still being patented. Basically, nothing is new under the sun. There are at least a couple "wave" patents after Emerson's, blade shapes and doodads that are specifically intended to hook onto a sheath or pocket in order to open a blade upon removal. Spyderco even owns one of these "wave-like" patents. The minutiae of patents literally demand a flock of lawyers to decipher one from another, and under scrutiny, it seems an awful lot can and do fail.
 
Plus, to protect your patent means spending money(lawyers, court)...Is it worth it? The time and money spent on protecting it as opposed to possible money lost from people purchasing other knives?
 
Is the hole in spyderco knives why people buy their knives instead of other companies knives? I would hope not, its the performance of their knives and the quality...
 
Now on the other hand if Benchmade copied there "triangle" style blade that they are known for, well then maybe I wou be upset/dissapointed...but the hole...not so much...
 
cutlerylover just give it up already. Spyderco owns the trademark on the hole, period. agree or disagree it is what it is and no matter how many posts you make about how you have to protect your patent or what about the liner lock does not change the fact that Spyderco owns the trademark. There is no gray area here.
 
OK...so what is spyderco going to do about this outrage then? Only time will tell right...We are certainly not going to do anything about it...It's up to Sal...Let's just wait and see...
 
cutlerylover please read your posts before hitting the post button, they are starting to get silly.

People buy Spyderco knives because of their performance, they out perform just about any other production knives on the market. Anyone that knows anything about Spyderco knows this, for me the hole is just a nice bonus.

The triangle blade? Please, the hole is much more synonymous with Spyderco than a triangle blade, everyone knows this also. When you see a hole in a blade you think Spyderco, thus the trademark.
 
Spyderco owns the trademark on the hole yes. However a trademark does not cover function. It covers a look, a logo, etc. Example: how a coke bottle used to look. Spydercos patent on the hole has expired. Patents cover function.

If I were Benchmade I would argue that the picture of the Spyder on the blade is a trademark as is the Butterfly on the blade of a Benchmade. The hole is simply an opening device and that is not covered under a trademark. That is covered under a patent.

Benchmade is not using the hole as a trademark they are using it as an opening device. Spyderco lost that when the patent expired. Sorry, that's just the brakes. When the Emerson wave patent expires people will use the crap out of it. There is a reason that patents expire and cannot be renewed.

My guess is that even if Spyderco wanted to they could not do anything about it. I heard rumors that they took Benchmade to court over the use of the hole in the Skirmish and lost. If that rumor is true then Spyderco can't do jack.
 
severedthumbs said:
cutlerylover please read your posts before hitting the post button, they are starting to get silly. People buy Spyderco knives because of their performance, they out perform just about any other production knives on the market. Anyone that knows anything about Spyderco knows this, for me the hole is just a nice bonus.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you have to read it again...the key word in that statement is "its"


Is the hole in spyderco knives why people buy their knives instead of other companies knives? I would hope not, its the performance of their knives and the quality...

p.s. a silly thread deserves silly comments...
 
Like I said before...Im not trying to take sides, I love Spyderco as much as I like Benchmade, I am just trying to put my opinions out there...
 
OK, I just sent a link to this thread to both spyderco and benchmade...I asked if they could clear up this debate..lets see what they say!
 
CaptainM said:
If I were Benchmade I would argue that the picture of the Spyder on the blade is a trademark as is the Butterfly on the blade of a Benchmade. The hole is simply an opening device and that is not covered under a trademark. That is covered under a patent.
Click to expand...

If they don't have permission to use the hole, that is the arguement they should use if Spyderco decides to defend their Trademark. If they win, good for them. If they lose they may be required to recall all the knives they have sold with the hole, plus they will of course no longer be allowed to sell any models with that feature. It could prove to be very, very expensive for Benchmade. If they win, it will open up the use of the hole to all other knife companies.

Isn't all this supposition fun?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top