Bottom front Thong Hole----- is a patented feature of Busse Knives??

Status
Not open for further replies.
WILLIAM.M

WILLIAM.M

Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
12,196
Bottom front Thong Hole----- is a patented feature of Busse Knives??

I was told that is was and other Knifemakers could not use it without permission

Is that correct???
 
Not a patented feature... it's a trademark. With trademarks, it's less about permission to license a design feature or usage and more about brand identity.
 
Last edited:
WILLIAM.M said:
Bottom front Thong Hole----- is a patented feature of Busse Knives??

I was told that is was and other Knifemakers could not use it without permission

Is that correct???
Click to expand...


I would give Jerry a call to get the correct answer. :)
 
Ive heard alot of things ranging from it is patented/trademarked to the patent has been submitted multiple times and denied every time because you cant trademark a hole.

Only way to be sure is to ask the shop like ankerson said
 
We have an incontestable trademark on the guard hole.

We never tried to patent it.

What is an incontestable trademark?

Once a trademark has been federally registered for five years, the owner of that mark can file an affidavit with the Patent and Trademark Office noting that the mark has been registered for five years and that the owner has continually used the mark for that five year period. Following the filing of this affidavit, the trademark becomes incontestable. Once a trademark is incontestable, certain things cannot be challenged in any later infringement action, including the mark’s validity, registration or ownership. Thus, in an infringement action involving an incontestable trademark, the other party cannot attempt to argue that the incontestable trademark is invalid and should not have been registered in the first place.


Hope that helps,

Jerry
.
 
Jerry Busse said:
We have an incontestable trademark on the guard hole.

We never tried to patent it.

What is an incontestable trademark?

Once a trademark has been federally registered for five years, the owner of that mark can file an affidavit with the Patent and Trademark Office noting that the mark has been registered for five years and that the owner has continually used the mark for that five year period. Following the filing of this affidavit, the trademark becomes incontestable. Once a trademark is incontestable, certain things cannot be challenged in any later infringement action, including the mark’s validity, registration or ownership. Thus, in an infringement action involving an incontestable trademark, the other party cannot attempt to argue that the incontestable trademark is invalid and should not have been registered in the first place.


Hope that helps,

Jerry
.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jerry

I sent a message telling a custom knife maker who posted a knife he made with that feature that it was your trademark

He said you could not patent a "hole in the blade".

Can another knife maker put a hole there legally without your permission???
 
WILLIAM.M said:
Thanks Jerry

I sent a message telling a custom knife maker who posted a knife he made with that feature that it was your trademark

He said you could not patent a "hole in the blade".

Can another knife maker put a hole there legally without your permission???
Click to expand...

From what I understand, trademarks aren't enforceable in that context, specifically because it's a one-off piece. If the maker tried to market an entire line of knives with that specific hole (specific meaning VERY specific), Mr. Busse could bring suit. Also, if the maker were misrepresenting his work as Mr. Busse's, there might be a successful challenge. With trademarks, as uyotg said above, it's all about brand identification. Now, a trade dress patent, which Mr. busse could pursue, would be a different story, albeit still difficult to enforce against a single knife made by a single custom maker.
 
You can just go to the USPTO site and search for it. "Busse" and "Busse Combat" are the only results. Nothing under "talon hole" or "guard hole". I'm not sure what else he would have called it.
 
hoxhunbe said:
From what I understand, trademarks aren't enforceable in that context, specifically because it's a one-off piece. If the maker tried to market an entire line of knives with that specific hole (specific meaning VERY specific), Mr. Busse could bring suit. Also, if the maker were misrepresenting his work as Mr. Busse's, there might be a successful challenge. With trademarks, as uyotg said above, it's all about brand identification. Now, a trade dress patent, which Mr. busse could pursue, would be a different story, albeit still difficult to enforce against a single knife made by a single custom maker.
Click to expand...

Just throwing this out there for conversation, but I wonder if the hole would be OK to put on a non-Busse knife if the maker's mark were on it. And maker's marks are almost always on knives--in fact, I feel safe saying the only times they aren't are when they're counterfeits, in which case it would either be sterile or have "BOSSE" or something in the same font. As long as the Busse Combat logo isn't on the knife and the maker's own logo or name is on it, would that dismiss any confusing similarity that could warrant infringement on Busse's trademark?
 
uyotg said:
Just throwing this out there for conversation, but I wonder if the hole would be OK to put on a non-Busse knife if the maker's mark were on it. And maker's marks are almost always on knives--in fact, I feel safe saying the only times they aren't are when they're counterfeits, in which case it would either be sterile or have "BOSSE" or something in the same font. As long as the Busse Combat logo isn't on the knife and the maker's own logo or name is on it, would that dismiss any confusing similarity that could warrant infringement on Busse's trademark?
Click to expand...

You cannot put a Nike Swoosh on anything without permission (read that as paid licensing fee) from Nike, nor an Apple apple without permission from Apple... Ask Mr. Gossman of Gossman knives what happened to Razorback knives (The University of Arkansas didn't think to well of him using their trademark)... People on this forum go ape sh-- when they see a "spyder hole" on a non spyderco knife... When I was in college an Italian restaurant in in Austin TX was closed down for trademark infringement. The name? Bevos- means drinks in Italian, at least that is what the owner claimed (The University of Texas is VERY protective of their trademarks). It does not matter if you put your mark on it too, you are infringing on a trademark if the trademark is present on your product/building/service/vehicle/etc if you have not entered into a legal contract whereby the owner of the trademark has granted you permission to use the trademark.
 
hlee said:
You cannot put a Nike Swoosh on anything without permission (read that as paid licensing fee) from Nike, nor an Apple apple without permission from Apple... Ask Mr. Gossman of Gossman knives what happened to Razorback knives (The University of Arkansas didn't think to well of him using their trademark)... People on this forum go ape sh-- when they see a "spyder hole" on a non spyderco knife... When I was in college an Italian restaurant in in Austin TX was closed down for trademark infringement. The name? Bevos- means drinks in Italian, at least that is what the owner claimed (The University of Texas is VERY protective of their trademarks). It does not matter if you put your mark on it too, you are infringing on a trademark if the trademark is present on your product/building/service/vehicle/etc if you have not entered into a legal contract whereby the owner of the trademark has granted you permission to use the trademark.
Click to expand...

I see your point. I would've said something about the swoosh and the apple being more stylized and recognizable... I mean, a hole is a hole is a hole, right? Can't expect much else from a drill, right? Yet the Spyderco hole is pretty recognizable to me for some reason. It must be the shape and placement of it on the blade in such a way that it looks like a bird's eyes on its head; objectively I suppose the Busse hole is no different.

Thanks, hlee
 
hlee said:
You cannot put a Nike Swoosh on anything without permission (read that as paid licensing fee) from Nike, nor an Apple apple without permission from Apple... Ask Mr. Gossman of Gossman knives what happened to Razorback knives (The University of Arkansas didn't think to well of him using their trademark)... People on this forum go ape sh-- when they see a "spyder hole" on a non spyderco knife... When I was in college an Italian restaurant in in Austin TX was closed down for trademark infringement. The name? Bevos- means drinks in Italian, at least that is what the owner claimed (The University of Texas is VERY protective of their trademarks). It does not matter if you put your mark on it too, you are infringing on a trademark if the trademark is present on your product/building/service/vehicle/etc if you have not entered into a legal contract whereby the owner of the trademark has granted you permission to use the trademark.
Click to expand...


BINGO!

'Nuff said.

Thanks all,

Jerry

.
 
Tankerwolf said:
You can just go to the USPTO site and search for it. "Busse" and "Busse Combat" are the only results. Nothing under "talon hole" or "guard hole". I'm not sure what else he would have called it.
Click to expand...

He didn't call it anything...he didn't have to. Google Busse Combat & Trademark for the details. Under "Mark Description", it says, "None Available"...

...and instead, this image was submitted with the registration of the trademark.
TalonHole_TM-area-shaded.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top