If that's the case why are there 100x more knives, with a lot more variation between them - that feature liner locks, frame locks, lockbacks, than there are axis lock knives?
Maybe because makers of those knives aren't held hostage by someone else's monopoly on a certain design?
And what would happen if all the aforementioned lock designs were patented by a single company? Most likely no one in this forum would have a folding knife collection worth a damn, hmm?
If you were told that anything you created was immediately public domain, how much money and time would you spend on creating it unless you were merely doing it for your own benefit? Do you REALLY think pharmaceutical companies would spend BILLIONS creating a drug that could be legally copied and sold by all other pharmas immediately after FDA approval? Do you think a band would create a CD just so people could take the music for free and go see the band play without having to pay an entry fee?
The idea behind the patent is to make it worthwhile for ANY inventor to benefit from the fruits of their labor, but again, NOT IN PERPETUITY.
The reason you don't see the "Axis" lock on a hundred other knives is that the owner of the patent didn't license it to a hundred other mfgrs. They licensed it to Benchmade. The patent is up effective July 2016, so you MAY see companies adding the same style (copied to the last detail) of lock to their knives soon
The liner lock, framelock, lockback is not protected by patent, hence why you see it on a multitude of knives.
So WHAT if all of the aforementioned designs were patented by the same company? That means they did the research, created something, and protected their creation. If someone else did it first, THEY would be able to protect it.
Regarding how collections would be affected, your line of reasoning misses one big point of logic: If all of those lock types WERE patented by the evil conglomerate in your fantasy, there is nothing that would prevent someone from coming up with a NEW design that doesn't infringe on the patent. They could patent their design and THEY would make money on it. CREATIVITY PROMOTED.
People whine that Spyderco patents and trademarks a hole in a blade. Why whine about it when no one else did it before them? Now that they make money off of something that only THEY did, it becomes a problem? I call major BS on that whole argument.
You want to put a Spydie hole in a blade? You shoulda' thought of it first. Otherwise, bugger off. It's the law.
