Cold Steel, Benchmade, and Spyderco's Intellectual Property

Sal, I wasn't aware it was being offered for sale, that changes the equation. That's disappointing, still I hope a solution can be reached and the knife produced, as I really do like the looks of it. If not, well, there have been greater tragedies in this world so I'll get over it. Good luck to all of you in finding a resolution.
 
thank you Roadrunner.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack the thread.

I too, am guilty of Thom's observation.

sal
 
Sal,

Are you saying that you share the guilt of getting hopping mad at Cold Steel and only mildly upset with Benchmade, if at all? Or that you're guilty of sharing my perception? Your wording was slightly confusing to me.
 
Sorry Thom. Didn't mean to confuse. I meant that you are, IMO, perceptive, in your observations of reaction, and that I too, must confess to loyalty to Spyderco which influences my thoughts of the three companies mentioned.

sal
 
Thanks, Sal. Made more sense the second time around.

The larger irony here is that, in the internet age, words speak louder than actions to many of us.

I understand the yearning of those who generally respect intellectual property and hope for an amicable solution between all involved parties, but I also hope that those whom don't respect intellectual property and expect vindication from a later tide of barbarism will see its importance and learn to respect both intellectual and physical property.

Without property rights, there are no human rights. If that can't be understood, at least know that the hole in your head that prevents this grasp and unleashes a sharp tongue is in violation of certain trademarks and patents.

:p
 
No, Selfinflicted, I don't. However, I do resort to laboredly obscure sarcasm which may sound similar.
 
Lynn Thompson may have a "challenging" personality, but his honor has been demonstrated to me more than once.
Click to expand...

Sal, have you seen the Cold Steel DVD 'More Proof'? In particular the segment with the Ti-light folder?

They show at least twice how the folder can be opened by snagging the quillion(sp) on the edge of a pocket as you draw the knife.

I have no problem with any individual modifying his personal knife to do this....but it is clear that they are using this feature as a selling point..there is no mention of Mr. Emerson, or his patent on the Wave....this seems like a violation to me....

Now...he may have already been contacted by Mr.Emerson, and there may be an agreement for royalties or whatever.....but I have seen nothing in his DVD, or his catalog that gives credit to or acknowledges Mr. Emerson in any way....

To me this is more blatent than using a round hole, because they go out of their way to draw attention to it.
 
I guess you've never put a zip tie on a Spyderco. I've never seen the knife advertised as having a wave feature, but I think anyone familiar with different brands and models would try it out.
 
DJ, when the Ti-Lite first came out, I showed it to Ernie Emerson at one of the NY shows, and he laughed.

Now that he's shown how the Wave can open a knife, all kinds of ways of doing it have become obvious, including snagging a prominent thumbstud on a pocket.

But the Wave is designed for this. The Ti-lite quillions and the thumbstuds and Darrel Ralph's Madd Maxx flipper guards were there originally for more traditional purposes, however easily they can be used to open the blade.
 
Hi DJ_Wolf,

No I hadn't seen the video. I've not studied Ernie's patent so I cannot fairly comment.

As mentioned by Esav, the "wave" function is not exclusive to to Ernie's invention. We used to modify our knives to do that in the 50's using a variety of methods. Ernie's design and patent must have specific requirements and limitations. A "clothing" or "pocket hook" on the rear spine is only one way.

It sounds like Cold Steel's video is taking advantage of their own design to sell Ernie's feature. I personally saw a knife in the 80's that had a "wave" or "clothing hook" cut into the blade towards the front close to the tip. The inventor said he had patented the idea for one hand opening. You would really have to study Ernie's patent to determine if the Cold Steel "sell" was an infringement, loophole or whatever?

For example, the "function" of opening a knife with one hand can be accomplished many ways; thumb studs, thumb discs, lobes (as used on the Solo line), holes, autos, semi autos, dents, rough spots, Cobra Hoods, Bram's Kinetic probe, etc.

Our original patent did not defend against other methods of achieving the same "funtion".

That said, I am not grandstanding for Cold Steel. I can say that personally, Spyderco has not had IP disputes that were not resolved amicably. We've not had to pay attorney's to speak with them.

As for "Honor", that is another story and I can only speak for Spyderco. I can plead ignorance for Spyderco when we infringed on Imperial-Schrade's name "Pro-Hunter". They told us, we changed.

When we create a design concept, our first question is "who is currently doing that?" If anyone is doing it, we will generally drop it or try to get very far away from it. eg: Our butterfly model was very carefully designed to be very different from existing models made by other companies. If we could not have created a "new" design, we would not have entered the market. I would have to say that is more "industry cooperation or "honor" if yo will. It may or may not include IP.

There are very few companies in the knife Industry that I would stand up and say "they are, in my personal opinion and experience, completely honorable".

Honor is different than IP. Cold Steel's claims that AUS-8 will outperform any other steel is pure BS, IMO (unless peformance by definition includes costs and profits). We would never consider making a Randall copy without Gary's permission. But I do not think that Spyderco's, Cold Steel's or Benchmade's honor is in question here.

I believe Thom's question was more a case of, "Isn't it interesting to observe how our emotions tend to influence our reason when discussing Spyderco's IP comparing Cold Steel's and Benchmade's possible infringment". (please forgive me Thom for my explanation).

The discussion of "honor" is a very heavy subject and would probably be best discussed in another thread.

sal
 
Like I said above I have no problem with an individual modding his personal knive to wave...

Zip ties, cutting out the hole to make a wave, or reversing the clip so the quillions or flipper guards can be used as a wave are all user mods....

But when a company uses it in their advertising to try to sell their wares a line is crossed. On their DVD they make it a point to mention it and demonstrate it....as if it were part of the knifes functional design....like a pocket clip, or thumb hole....

If it is ok to use the quillion to open a knife on the pocket, and get away with it by it's not being purposly 'designed' to do so, then how is that any different then the three holes in the Blackwood folder with one just happening to work as an opening hole?

As for not all of Mr. Blackwoods knives not having three holes in the blade...thus rendering his use of them on his folder as part of his design scheme unfounded....and is only a way of trying to get around the patent..
Mr Thompson only has one folder with quillions on it that I am aware of, so that would make me think that he has less of a leg to stand on then Mr. Blackwood.
 
I didn't see your post Sal until after I posted again...Thanks for taking time to reply.:)
 
I have a Kershaw Talon, a hawksbill folder. It came in plain edge, serrated (like mine), and bottle opener blades. The bottle opener was a Wave, but in line with the back of the blade, not standing up from it. Does anyone know if the Talon preceded Ernie's Wave?
 
Hi DJ, I guess we're back on the "hole"? I will try to share my thoughts.

1. Cold steel's "sell" may or may not infringe. If it is an infringement, Ernie should let them know and they will stop or pay (if Ernie wants to share). If it is not an infringement, then the question of infringement is moot. It may be a question of honor?

2. The round hole is a trademark, not a patent. The "identity" of the round hole associated with Spyderco is almost 25 years old. That's a lot of dues that must be paid to gain an identity.

In my opinion, nobody uses a round hole unless they want to "borrow" Spyderco's identity. that "Round hole" has 25 years of integrity, quality and innovation" that is immediatly associated with it. That is why Spyderco has consistently, exclusively, and persistenly used it on almost every folding knife (1 exception) that had Spyderco's name on it. That is how an "identity" is created.

There are many other shapes that can be incorporated into a design. It always makes a design "look good" in any industry to "borrow" a successful identity. It's also easier to copy one than to create your own. That's why America has created patent, trademark and trade dress laws. To protect a well earned idea or identity.

3. The use of 3 descending round holes is a patent owned by Kershaw and is part of their developing identity as well. Spyderco would never consider incorporating that into a design without first speaking to Kershaw about it. We would guess any other maker would extend the same "courtesy".

I realize that new makers (Mr. Blackwood is, IMO, a new maker) have a tough time creating their own identities. It is a something we all have to go through. It takes much effort, time, persistence and consistency.

The "function" of a trademark or "identity" is to let the buyer immediatly identify a particular brand.

I'm not condoning Cold Steel's behavior, just explaining what I perceive to be the difference. I hope I have explained it so that you can see that difference?

sal
 
Originally posted by Sal Glesser


No offense to Mr. Blackwood, but to me, Mr. Blackwood's design looks like a Ken Onion designed Spyderco with a Chris Reeve style Integeral linerlock.

sal
Click to expand...

No offense but the Benchmade Blackwood looks nothing like anything Spyderco ever made , gimme a break. :rolleyes: Looks to me like there is a whole lot of people who want to jump on this design. Why ? Cause it rocks and perhaps they are just a tad PO'd that they didn't design it.

for knife knutts to be discussing this in an open forum is one thing , if I was Neil I sure as hell would not comment on anything.

I have seen more posts that seem to be questioning Neil's integrity and honor , however he knows he does not need to post to defend it.
His honor and integrity stands on it's own.



Look outside the box , it is not a Spyderco . Sorry.
 
I think it was in poor taste for Mr. Thompson to speak ill of un-named makers that resemble Strider and Emerson, but I'm not sure that using non-wave or non-wavelike protrusions to open a folder in a wavelike manner is a patent violation. Not being a patent attorney, I may be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top