Cold steel vs CRKT suit and claims made by each

This can be discussed from a legal standpoint, and claims made by the various litigants and users should be taken in their proper contexts. First, saying one is "a company dedicated to making the strongest, sharpest knives in the world" is not the same as saying one makes the strongest and sharpest knives in the world. CRKT never made its claims as a company an issue. Instead, after it developed its LAWKS/AutoLAWKS systems, it then made claims regarding the strength of its knives that were not tested even under rudimentary procedures. The most incredible of these claims was that its LAWKS-equipped liner-lock folding knives were "virtual" (meaning "same as") fixed-blade knives. That's an entirely different level than saying the company is "dedicated" (or has the goal of) being the strongest locking systems in the world. In fact, when the LAWKS folding knives were tested, the failures were legion. Company execs would certainly have had to know this fairly early on when they tested the knives. The question is whether the knives were unreasonably prone to failing or that the safety offered no detectable benefit to them failing. Or, it could be argued that the claims that the LAWKS knives being "virtual" fixed blades was a blatantly misleading claim that resulted in false expectations, injury or even death.

Of course the best way to handle it would have been for competitors (such as Cold Steel) to do the tests and release them on YouTube, Where everyone could see them. On the other hand, the CRKT execs had to have known the claims were blatantly false. After all, it was an idea that worked well on paper. Excess negative force on the spine of the blade would cause the pressure to be placed from the bottom of the blade onto 1) the liner and eventually 2) against the LAWKS block. After all, where else was the force to go? Checkmate! But not so fast. The flimsy block, it turns out, may block it to a point -- but not before the liner is forced by the pressure into the space between the block and the blade. And once it finds the space, it can travel as far north as that space goes, and by then, ladies and gentlemen, fingers are on the floor!



 
Last edited:
HJK said:
The motto may not be litersally true, and obviously I don't think it can be, but if you put it in quotation marks, like several other mottos, it should be apparent it's not a literal claim. But a judge might think otherwise. Is Cliff Stamp going to give expert evidence?
Click to expand...

My observation was that they have transitioned from making a claim that they make the strongest and sharpest knives to making a statement that they are dedicatedly striving to do so. That is a significant difference as the previous position could be easily challenged where the present one cannot. Sorry that I was not more clear in my previous post.
 
Confederate said:
This can be discussed from a legal standpoint, and claims made by the various litigants and users should be taken in their proper contexts. First, saying one is "a company dedicated to making the strongest, sharpest knives in the world" is not the same as saying one makes the strongest and sharpest knives in the world. CRKT never made its claims as a company an issue. Instead, after it developed its LAWKS/AutoLAWKS systems, it then made claims regarding the strength of its knives that were not tested even under rudimentary procedures. The most incredible of these claims was that its LAWKS-equipped liner-lock folding knives were "virtual" (meaning "same as") fixed-blade knives. That's an entirely different level than saying the company is "dedicated" (or has the goal of) being the strongest locking systems in the world. In fact, when the LAWKS folding knives were tested, the failures were legion. Company execs would certainly have had to know this fairly early on when they tested the knives. The question is whether the knives were unreasonably prone to failing or that the safety offered no detectable benefit to them failing. Or, it could be argued that the claims that the LAWKS knives being "virtual" fixed blades was a blatantly misleading claim that resulted in false expectations, injury or even death.

Of course the best way to handle it would have been for competitors (such as Cold Steel) to do the tests and release them on YouTube, Where everyone could see them. On the other hand, the CRKT execs had to have known the claims were blatantly false. After all, it was an idea that worked well on paper. Excess negative force on the spine of the blade would cause the pressure to be placed from the bottom of the blade onto 1) the liner and eventually 2) against the LAWKS block. After all, where else was the force to go? Checkmate! But not so fast. The flimsy block, it turns out, may block it to a point -- but not before the liner is forced by the pressure into the space between the block and the blade. And once it finds the space, it can travel as far north as that space goes, and by then, ladies and gentlemen, fingers are on the floor!



Click to expand...

Worth multiple reads. It really is a pity, CRKT have such tacticool designs. By knowing the faults in the lawking mechanisms, the customer loses out... ... though better that than their fingers.
 
1. Cold Steel uses "virtually." Pot, meet kettle.

2. "Virtual" does not mean "same as" in any dictionary I can find, which no doubt is a relief to Cold Steel given it's repeated use of "virtually." (e.g. " virtually indestructible" July 18, 2015)

Cold Steel Knives - World's Strongest Sharpest Knives
Click to expand...
July 18, 2015
 
lots companies make claims about there products being superior.

I enjoy the cold steel video, not because they are realistic test but they are minorly informative but mainly. Entertaining.

CRKT has designs I like as does cold steel. I doubt anyone that knows a lot about knives would consider a linar lock stronger than a back lock. The lawks system does improve upon the ability of a linar lock to absord shock which is a big plus if you are hacking away with you "pocket knife". The triad is going to have strength advantages over it just as the linar will be faster.

All in all I think cold steel should drop the suit, unless there is some detail they are holding back. But right now it seems childish and if they are going to sue over exaggerated claims than they mine as well take about half the industry to court including themselves.
 
As with the previous thread- we are all speculating here.

CS won't discuss the case any further
CRKT have not made any public statements on the subject at all. (to my knowledge)
It'll probably get settled out of court and we may never find out the terms.

To me- it's yet another example of Dead Cat Marketing.....Throw a dead cat on the table and everyone will be talking about it and you.
It's distasteful but effective....And here we are again, talking about it.

CS are not alone in the world in taking this approach to their marketing- but they are pretty much outliers on the distribution curve of normative behaviour in the knife world
What sticks in people's throats (and mine too) is that if you asked anyone into knives "Which company has the most overblown marketing?" then CS is nearly always the answer.....It certainly isn't ever CRKT.

And as has also been sagely pointed out- 'Knife guys' normally take the approach of 'weeding their own garden' not throwing rocks at everyone else.
 
Last edited:
2. "Virtual" does not mean "same as" in any dictionary I can find
Click to expand...

Exactly right. Confederate, you just made up your own definition didn't you?

To be honest I think removing the other thread instead of just locking it shows me that CS is pretty thinned skinned. If the thread was full of flowery compliments from Cold Steels admirers it would still be there and open.

All of us customers aren't geek-ed out fans and will point out actions we don't agree with. I believe this was the first thread that was disappeared since I've been coming to BF. Usually just locking them is enough. Somebody really didn't like it apparently. :)
 
The Mastiff said:
Exactly right. Confederate, you just made up your own definition didn't you?

To be honest I think removing the other thread instead of just locking it shows me that CS is pretty thinned skinned. If the thread was full of flowery compliments from Cold Steels admirers it would still be there and open.

All of us customers aren't geek-ed out fans and will point out actions we don't agree with. I believe this was the first thread that was disappeared since I've been coming to BF. Usually just locking them is enough. Somebody really didn't like it apparently. :)
Click to expand...

They let it go on for hundreds of comments, almost all critical or negative. If they were feeling thin-skinned they would have locked it day 1. I'm not thrilled they flushed it down the memory hole rather than just locking it, but even that didn't happen until people started literally making accusations of fascism. I pretty strongly disagree with the lawsuit, and I've made that clear, but to call them thin-skinned about it is almost laughable.
 
Didn't Cold Steel copy the G.I. Tanto and then market it by calling the original designer a liar and a cheat?
 
but to call them thin-skinned about it is almost laughable.
Click to expand...

I've got to disagree. Deleting the whole thread is evidence enough for me.

I counted mine up today. I've got 27 CS products. I had planned on getting 2 more of the new models. The knives are getting better and better but the guys running it seem to be doing the opposite.
 
The Mastiff said:
I've got to disagree. Deleting the whole thread is evidence enough for me.

I counted mine up today. I've got 27 CS products. I had planned on getting 2 more of the new models. The knives are getting better and better but the guys running it seem to be doing the opposite.
Click to expand...

The second part of your statement I do agree with. The recent massive strides they've made are only hurt by actions like this lawsuit.
 
I agree. The thing that's really striking to me is that Cold Steel went after a manufacturer who claims that their folders can be made into "virtual" fixed-blades but not after a manufacturer who claims that their folder can be made into a "real" fixed-blade. Seems to me if the first claim is egregious enough to sue over, the second claim is completely off the reservation. Only question is, where's the posse? :confused:

Now if it's a matter of lock strength, how much lock strength is required before a manufacturer can legitimately claim that their folder is a "virtual" fixed-blade (if ever)? How much lock strength is required before a manufacturer can legitimately claim that their folder is a "real" fixed-blade (if ever)? And who gets to make those decisions?

PS: For what it's worth, I think demoncase nailed it:

demoncase said:
As with the previous thread- we are all speculating here.

CS won't discuss the case any further
CRKT have not made any public statements on the subject at all. (to my knowledge)
It'll probably get settled out of court and we may never find out the terms.

To me- it's yet another example of Dead Cat Marketing.....Throw a dead cat on the table and everyone will be talking about it and you.
It's distasteful but effective....And here we are again, talking about it.

CS are not alone in the world in taking this approach to their marketing- but they are pretty much outliers on the distribution curve of normative behaviour in the knife world
What sticks in people's throats (and mine too) is that if you asked anyone into knives "Which company has the most overblown marketing?" then CS is nearly always the answer.....It certainly isn't ever CRKT.

And as has also been sagely pointed out- 'Knife guys' normally take the approach of 'weeding their own garden' not throwing rocks at everyone else.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bld522 said:
Now if it's a matter of lock strength, how much lock strength is required before a manufacturer can legitimately claim that their folder is a "virtual" fixed-blade (if ever)? How much lock strength is required before a manufacturer can legitimately claim that their folder is a "real" fixed-blade (if ever)? And who gets to make those decisions?
Click to expand...

I believe that if under all circumstances, the blade will break before the lock fails, or the pivot breaks, then the knife can be called a "virtual fixed blade" as in a fixed blade, with identical blade materials and geometry will fail at the same point. If the folder can be stressed in a manner that causes the lock or pivot to fail (even if such abuse is unlikely) the blade cannot be called a virtual fixed blade. This is my opinion. Ultimately the consumer will decide for themselves-as I have.

Now, going back to this:

bld522 said:
a manufacturer who claims that their folder can be made into a "real" fixed-blade.
Click to expand...

I am safe to assume that your are referring to E.R.'s RAO? That whole fixed blade thing is a bunch of bullshit. An Axis Lock, even with a stop pin to prevent closing, cannot handle the same about of positive pressure that a fixed blade of identical dimensions and materials could. I say test it. Mount it edge up, and hang some weight off of it. The Axis will shit it's pants in short order.
 
ursamajor said:
I am safe to assume that your are referring to E.R.'s RAO? That whole fixed blade thing is a bunch of bullshit. An Axis Lock, even with a stop pin to prevent closing, cannot handle the same about of positive pressure that a fixed blade of identical dimensions and materials could. I say test it. Mount it edge up, and hang some weight off of it. The Axis will shit it's pants in short order.
Click to expand...
Yep, I'm talking about the RAO when I use the term "real" fixed-blade. And I've had a poll running over in General for awhile discussing whether or not a knife can be a real folder and a real fixed-blade at the same time. I'm not sure if you're aware of it. If not, come join the party:

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/1307784

:)
 
Confederate said:
This can be discussed from a legal standpoint, and claims made by the various litigants and users should be taken in their proper contexts. First, saying one is "a company dedicated to making the strongest, sharpest knives in the world" is not the same as saying one makes the strongest and sharpest knives in the world. CRKT never made its claims as a company an issue. Instead, after it developed its LAWKS/AutoLAWKS systems, it then made claims regarding the strength of its knives that were not tested even under rudimentary procedures. The most incredible of these claims was that its LAWKS-equipped liner-lock folding knives were "virtual" (meaning "same as") fixed-blade knives. That's an entirely different level than saying the company is "dedicated" (or has the goal of) being the strongest locking systems in the world. In fact, when the LAWKS folding knives were tested, the failures were legion. Company execs would certainly have had to know this fairly early on when they tested the knives. The question is whether the knives were unreasonably prone to failing or that the safety offered no detectable benefit to them failing. Or, it could be argued that the claims that the LAWKS knives being "virtual" fixed blades was a blatantly misleading claim that resulted in false expectations, injury or even death.

Of course the best way to handle it would have been for competitors (such as Cold Steel) to do the tests and release them on YouTube, Where everyone could see them. On the other hand, the CRKT execs had to have known the claims were blatantly false. After all, it was an idea that worked well on paper. Excess negative force on the spine of the blade would cause the pressure to be placed from the bottom of the blade onto 1) the liner and eventually 2) against the LAWKS block. After all, where else was the force to go? Checkmate! But not so fast. The flimsy block, it turns out, may block it to a point -- but not before the liner is forced by the pressure into the space between the block and the blade. And once it finds the space, it can travel as far north as that space goes, and by then, ladies and gentlemen, fingers are on the floor!



Click to expand...

Where do you see "dedicated to making"? Clear as day to me I see Cold Steel Knives - World's Strongest Sharpest Knives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top