Cold steel vs CRKT suit and claims made by each

In case anyone was wondering as to the outcome of this lawsuit:
Statement made on CRKT's facebook page:
CRKT today announced a settlement of a lawsuit filed in June 2015 in Los Angeles by Cold Steel relating to advertising by Columbia River Knife and Tool (CRKT). CRKT is satisfied with the terms of the settlement, which are confidential. The lawsuit will be dismissed. Neither party will make any further comment about the lawsuit or its resolution.
Click to expand...

And for reference- if you go take a look at CRKT's webpage, you'll find that 'virtual fixed blade' is still there- front and centre.
http://www.crkt.com/knifeinnovations

Seems a certain balloon full of hot air might've got punctured....I bet he won't make a video of that. ;)
 
demoncase said:
And for reference- if you go take a look at CRKT's webpage, you'll find that 'virtual fixed blade' is still there- front and centre:

http://www.crkt.com/knifeinnovations
Click to expand...

Yep. Even though neither party will discuss the terms of the settlement, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out just how far CS was able to get with its suit . . . virtually nowhere. ;)
 
Last edited:
bld522 said:
Yep. Even though neither party will discuss the terms of the settlement, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out just how far CS was able to get with its suit . . . virtually nowhere. ;)
Click to expand...
Hahahahaha! [emoji79]
 
Esav Benyamin said:
It is really very clear. Cold Steel was willing to host the discussion. They even started it. They were not willing to support it once it went off-topic.
Click to expand...

I respectfully submit it's a bit different than that....they were willing to host the discussion but not willing to support it beyond the press release at all. I understand and respect ColdSteel's [the moderator, I mean] position where he isn't allowed to talk about it. I don't think anyone here is mad at that individual...rather, they/we are P.O.'d at the company [meaning LT] for creating the suit, then not discussing exactly why, then "settling" it...and again no details were, are or ever will be forthcoming. All that's doing is creating the tension everyone's trying to avoid. I said it before...human nature creates the need to have a "reason" for something. If the obvious answer isn't provided, they [humans] will make up their own crap to fill in that void.

dr_fosg8 said:
1. The original thread was really nothing more than making a public accusation as nothing has been legally decided yet. By unveiling it in this manner it makes it look, at least to me, that it is nothing more than an attention grabber and a way to stir the pot.

2. No such thing as bad publicity right?

3. Next thing you know someone will sue cold steel for getting caught with one of their knives in a court house because the new catch phrase is, after all, anytime-anywhere.
Click to expand...

numbered for corresponding replies:

1. Exactly correct, as was said about a hundred times by as many posters.
2. Apparently not to LT. It appears to me to be just like the smear campaigns used in politics. I guess the mentality of "well if it works for them.........applies...
3. I don't want to see anyone in court over stupid crap....anyone...however, situations like these make me root for the underdog. I'd most definitely get the warm and fuzzy feeling of "just deserts" if that were to happen though...

Monofletch said:
I wonder how many sales will be lost because of this silly lawsuit?
Click to expand...

At least one that I know of....and anyone else I can convince to go with CRKT over CS.....

Esav Benyamin said:
Without operator error, LAWKS doesn't matter, either.
Click to expand...

True and to be 10000000000 % honest, NO locks, lawks or lox matter AT ALL....this one [and any like it] haven't had one, nor needed one since the USERs were RESPONSIBLE enough to not have to NEED them:



chucknduck said:
Sorry, I think you must have misunderstood me. That was my point. It was an accident. It wasnt the knife's fault. I was trying to point out that injuries from knives to the operator way more often then not comes from accidents, not locks failing as Lynn Thompson claims in his statement.
Click to expand...

Well you can't market that or bring a lawsuit claiming a loss from that, now can you?
 
Cold Steel Knives said:
That thread had descended into name calling, mudslinging and trolling.
That is just not acceptable.
As I have said many times, I am fine with polite discussion (that's what forums are for) but I am not going to tolerate personal and petty insults etc.

I really do believe we are all here for the same reason, our shared love of sharp stuff. It's a hobby, a passion and even a career for a lot of us, so I think it's perfectly acceptable to have strong opinions and to disagree sometimes - BUT I think discussion on this platform should be just like if we met in the bar or wherever at a show and talked about blades. Show the same level of respect that you would if we had this conversation face to face.
Even if I disagree with a fellow knife lover, I'm still going to buy him a beer and talk. I'm not going to insult him, his friends and his company. It's just not necessary.
Believe me, I'd rather be talking about knives than deleting posts.
Thanks for your understanding
Click to expand...

It sounds to me that after careful reflection maybe the prosecution has seen error or inflation of ego and the embarrassment has caused an attitude adjustment. This is one of the most petty displays of California liberal injustice I've seen in awile. If you support knife rights, you must equally support the rights of manufactures to make their inflated claimes. I am guessing maybe a woman is involved
 
YOUR COMPANY IS THE KING OF INFLATED CLAIMS. I suspect CRKT will get a nice damage claims settlement in the counter suit. Plus the suit was presented by CS here on BF for discussion. Just because CS is in the wrong doesn't mean the discussion is over. Take your pennants
 
codycash said:
YOUR COMPANY IS THE KING OF INFLATED CLAIMS. I suspect CRKT will get a nice damage claims settlement in the counter suit. Plus the suit was presented by CS here on BF for discussion. Just because CS is in the wrong doesn't mean the discussion is over. Take your pennants
Click to expand...

Penance*

[video]https://youtu.be/U6j5p5f7sto?t=20s[/video]
 
codycash said:
It sounds to me that after careful reflection maybe the prosecution has seen error or inflation of ego and the embarrassment has caused an attitude adjustment. This is one of the most petty displays of California liberal injustice I've seen in awile. If you support knife rights, you must equally support the rights of manufactures to make their inflated claimes. I am guessing maybe a woman is involved
Click to expand...

Just what this thread needed, some casual sexism.
 
ursamajor said:
Just curious...do you boycott Spyderco, and only direct people to Benchmade?
Click to expand...
Why? Both companies are run respectfully and professionaly. Unlike cold steel which looks more and more like a desperate carnival act.
 
codycash said:
It sounds to me that after careful reflection maybe the prosecution has seen error or inflation of ego and the embarrassment has caused an attitude adjustment. This is one of the most petty displays of California liberal injustice I've seen in awile. If you support knife rights, you must equally support the rights of manufactures to make their inflated claimes. I am guessing maybe a woman is involved
Click to expand...

Insipid Moniker said:
Just what this thread needed, some casual sexism.
Click to expand...

Yep. That comment was inappropriate, all right. :thumbdn: It's not the first inappropriate comment I've seen posted in this forum in the last day or two. I can't help but wonder if the moderator is too busy licking his wounds over the suit dismissal to keep a proper eye on what's being posted here.
 
Last edited:
Yo Mama said:
Why? Both companies are run respectfully and professionaly. Unlike cold steel which looks more and more like a desperate carnival act.
Click to expand...
A knife company suing another knife company. Leatherman v Coast, (for false advertising like Cold Steel v CRKT) is another example.


Your last sentence is a matter of opinion. I remember a person upset at Benchmade's practices, voice his opinion on the internet, and get sued by Benchmade for it.
 
Last edited:
Except that the CS vs CRKT suit wasn't about false advertising. It was about trademark infringement. Read the suit. ;)
 
ursamajor said:
Your last sentence is a matter of opinion. I remember a person upset at Benchmade's practices, voice his opinion on the internet, and get sued by Benchmade for it.
Click to expand...
Yep. I've made it a practice not to state my opinions as fact if I can't back them up. Sure is fun to watch folks cross the line, though . . .
 
bld522 said:
Yep. That comment was inappropriate, all right. :thumbdn: It's not the first inappropriate comment I've seen posted in this forum in the last day or two. I can't help but wonder if the moderator is too busy licking his wounds over the suit dismissal to keep a proper eye on what's being posted here.
Click to expand...
Why would the moderator be "licking his wounds"

I do suspect that many posting in this thread do not understand how settlements work, and that nearly all settlements contain an confidentiality agreement. The moderator here, is still an agent of Cold Steel. Even if they were not in fact a Cold Steel employee, but say, just someone who knew Thompson-and they disclosed information about the case, it would be more likely than not, that the info came from an involved party of Cold Steel's thereby putting Cold Steel in violation of the agreement.

And about the adverts of CRKT. Just because they are up still does not mean a thing. Do you guys actually think that if a judgement regarding advertisement, or anything else in civil law is instantaneous? That 2 seconds after a decision is made, that someone could come back to the judge, and say losing party is in violation, because they have yet to comply with order? There is usually a time period given to correct, and comply. It is usually longer than a month. Not the instantaneous, that so many here allude to.

The case was settled, not dismissed.
 
bld522 said:
Except that the CS vs CRKT suit wasn't about false advertising. It was about trademark infringement. Read the suit. ;)
Click to expand...
Really? The first sentences of the suit that was filed read:

"Plaintiff Cold Steel Inc (Cold Steel) complaints of Defendant Colombia River Knife & Tool Company, GB II Corporation dba Colombia River Knife & Tool Company and Does 1-10, and alleges as Follows:

This is an action for false advertising section 43(a) of the Lantham Act..."

Now I may not be the smartest man in the world, but I do believe the crux of Cold Steel's complaint, had to do with false advertising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top