Copying.

Keith Montgomery

Keith Montgomery

Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
29,205
On the Blade Discussion forum I started a thread about knock-offs. That lead me to thinking about what people on this forum thought about makers that copy other makers knives.

Is this perceived by makers as a compliment or is it considered a lack of imagination?

Those of you that collect knives, what do you think of makers that copy the work of others?

Personally, I have mixed feeling about this. On one hand, I do not buy knives from makers that I see as copies. I will still purchase knives from that maker, it is just that these knives will have to be original ideas. On the other hand, I do very much like the knives that some makers do that are almost exact copies of knives designed by Bob Loveless. The Loveless drop point hunter and fighter are probably the most copied knives out there. I would buy these knives in a heartbeat.

I see nothing wrong in taking what a maker thinks is the best part of several different knife designs and combining them into an original design of his/her own. After all, there is not much new under the sun as far as knife designs are concerned. It is when I see one makers knife that looks almost exactly like another makers knife that I feel a little disappointed in the lack of imagination I see.
 
I've come to understand that if something is copied often enough, it's no longer thought of as a copy. It become a cultral icon, public domain.

If a company in Taiwan made a Ed Fowler Proghorn look alike, a lot of people would complain. But lets say it is as widely copied as a Randal type, then everyone would buy one.

You can copy someone else's work, but you have to live with the stigma that yours is second rate to the original. Not a bad thing for a volumn maker. The small guys however have to innovate, standout or die.
 
I feel there is a great difference between a copy and those who seek to make the real thing. Those who seek to understand all the variables that reside in the knife, why? What For? How? and give each of these elements,and more, a full consideration are participating with the other maker and doing more than copy. They are able to share in the creation. Those who simply scratch the surface lag far behind.

Some knives are easy to copy, others require more emotion than those with little devotion are able or willing to put into the knife. The partnership becoms more than copy when the complexity of the knife is recognised by the second maker who is able to understand the spirit of that knife can take it further with time.
 
Long ago it was said that "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". I would venture to say that a hundred times more Loveless copies have been made than the number that Bob was ever able to turn out. I guess that the question is; Who owns the art, the artist or the art lover? I think that the only crime is when someone knowingly claims a design that was originated by someone else and has not been substantially modified. Racer Roy



KNOWLEDGE THAT IS NOT SHARED IS LOST.
 
If I make a 'copy' of a $20 bill (besides being illegal), it's considered a counterfeit. If I 'copy' someone's signature onto a stolen check, it's considered a forgery. If I make a 'copy' a maker's knife, it's considered a ????? This might not be all that logical but I feel some type of recognition should be given to the originator of the design that was copied. Just rambling on at 4:00am!
 
Well if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.......

Then STRIDER KNIVES is really getting flattered........cause a bunch of people are RIPPING OFF THEIR DESIGNS!!! :( :( :(
 
I would never copy somebody elses design deliberately, but knives have been around for quite a while, so chances are, that the design I draw and make out of steel, has already been made by someone else. Unique knives like mr. Fowlers are more unlikely to be copied by a knifemaker who hasn't seen one of them somewhere.
 
Imitation is the sincerest form of imitatiom, flattery don't come into it.
 
Not an easy area to deal with - very few truely unique designs, blade styles & handle designs. Would have to say that most knives being made incorporate design elements or are very similar to existing designs or influenced by earlier work. The hardest part is to determine at what point incorporating design elements that have proven themselves over time becomes outright rip-off copying. And then there is copying a design & giving recognition of the earlier work. Lot of grey area here, particularly in the Tactical/Combat/Utility knife area - most blade, handle and guard designs are not unique - in majority of cases may be more important to focus on overall execution of a design, fit, finsh, construction etc. Sure this will get a lot of discussion - should be entertaining! :rolleyes:

Bill
 
Clearly copying another makers design and claiming it as your own is fraudulent and should not be tolerated.

Making a Loveless, Randal or Scagel style knife and selling it as such is perceived as honorable.

In between there are the HUGE grey areas of Makers who are imfluenced by other makers who may have served as mentors or teachers; Makers who incorporate specific ideas into their own designs; and Makers who design similar knives independently because they are designing for the same functions.
 
I am not talking about Randall type designs..........you need to take a look at what I am talking about....THEIR EXACT KNIVES with cord wrap and all, are being made in Taiwan and marketed here. Exact duplicates; and not just one or two knives....their entire line copied exactly- Linton Knives/Taiwan... Its wrong! :(

I saw a guy set up across the aisle from Chris Reeve last year who had EXACT copies of Chris' sebenza on his table, it looked like he had even used one of Chris' knives to make his templates. That stinks!

I will totally agree that there is nothing new under the sun....thats why it stinks twice as bad when someone works hard to come up with "their look" and someone else steals it without remorse. The TNT did not arrive by random chance, nor did a lot of Mick and Duanes designs.
 
Counterfeit copies should be illegal. It is damn expensive and very time consuming to obtain and enforce a patent on a new mechanism, and to the best of my knowledge a knife design can not be copy-righted. I guess it's a case of another "crime" going unpunished. As far as Ed's designs being totally unique, I think that the Native Americans were using a similar blade shape and handle material several thousand years ago. They sure weren't able to match his fit, finish, and cutting ability though.
If you exclude art knives and the various tacticals, I don't think that there are really any TRUELY unique knives being designed. This is particularly true of fixed blades. They have a cutting edge and a handle. Believe me, this generation is not the first to discover all knowledge. We revive, revise, and redefine.
If people only buy a knife because of how it looks, they are really missing the boat. If I am wrong than why are there so many posts concerned with the best steel, the best heat treating, the best fit and finish, and the best performance? Racer Roy


KNOWLEDGE THAT IS NOT SHARED IS LOST.
 
Racer, if the Native Indians were making knives that looked like Ed's thousands of years ago, they sure weren't doing it in steel. I suppose that they could have shaped rocks to look like Ed's blades, but I doubt it. I do understand what you are saying, but I disagree with your conclusion. I think that design features that borrow from what has come before can be put together in very unique ways. Ed's knives are distinctively Ed's knives. You would never mistake them for the work of another. The same can be said of the knives of Tom Mayo, Jerry Hossom, Neil Blackwood, Mike Snody, Ferret and I could go on and on. Just because a clip point and double guard has been done before doesn't mean that it can't be done again, but in a very distinctive way. How is it that when we see many knives we immediately know who the maker is. It is because the maker had the imagination and vision to come up with his/her very original way of putting all the pieces together.
 
Native americans were making them out of steel once the euopeans arives. Used barrell rings. But back onto the subjest. I dont beleave it to be honest to steal a copy from anothe makers style. But if U look @ most of the older more experienced makers most of them look the same. (fixed blade stuff) New makers are just taking and modifing the old stuff. Yes Tiwan sucks cause they steal designs. They have been doing it to cloths manufactures for years.


People who have a clue will not buy the rip-offs. People who dont will and U get what U pay for.

Just my .02
 
A complex question.

Perhaps the word "copying" has too many interpretations and synonyms to be the basis of the question (no insult intended).

As it happens, this same subject arises in my field, architecture, in which "copying" of design elements is often referred to as "borrowing".

Duplication, which is entirely different than "borrowing" consists of complete replication, (such as is mentioned by Tom Mayo) and is illegal if you have copyrighted the design.

An "homage" is an acknowledged tribute to a master (ala the Loveless Drop Points and Randall Model 1), and when time and clarity of understanding become somewhat universal amongst our society, an homage is generally considered a noble undertaking and a very important learning tool.

In architecture, as with knives, it is often difficult to clearly state whether a design has been "imitated", since when certain features are mixed and matched, the character of each feature changes.

Also, as Tom indicated, "there is nothing new under the sun". I do not agree with this rather broad statement, but I do agree that there are certain archtypical designs (hawkbill, wharncliffe, trailing point, spearpoint, etc.) which are copies by every knifemaker. Again, specific application of design features modifies these archtypes and makes them unique.

Throughout the globe, "duplication" is considered illegal, although enforcement is at the whim of each and every individual government.

You will find numerous court battles over "copying", which is incredibly subjective and the outcome of these legal battles is rarely predictable.

The fact of the matter is that the more often than not, the damage to the orignal designer from copying comes when they fail to protect themselves. That is a tough circumstance, but we live in a tough world.
 
I've knowingly copied only 1 maker. I liked the design enough to want to make it but before I did so I called the maker and asked permission. This well known maker was very gracious about my request and only asked one thing that I not make it an exact replica of his knife. I did as he asked. He also thanked me for asking, as I was the first maker to ask him. He commented that no one had ever botherd to ask before. When I sell one of these designs I give this maker the credit for his design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top