eBAY Hilarity

Just to please the general concensus i will no longer advertise my knives as a copy you have almost convinced me that i am wrong. I will even change the description on my website tomorrow evening but i just got in from a night on the casino boat and im off to bed. What a wonderful thing these forums can be. To be able to bring to the table just about any topic no matter how ridiculous to some that it may seem. I have learned in the past two days that i perhaps have a lot to learn about this business. All i know is that i like knives of all sorts whether they be cheap or expensive and i plan on continuing to sell some of each.
At the same time i would like to be able to bring my opinion to the table without being judged because of my username "suncruz" based upon my earlier posts on these forums. Someday when i have reached the level of success i hope for maybe i won't even carry these cheaper "ripoffs" as you guys call them. All i know is that they do sell well and i also have some name brand knives at great prices that sit and collect dust. More because of the financial situation of most of the people in my marketplace. That is all i have to say. Good evening and goodnight.
 
Dear Suncruz, You can sell anything you might want, but how do you get $20 for these knives? They sell at the flea markets/swap meets for $6-$8.00...(atleast in my neck of the woods)and with shipping from you, its $24.00 !! I guess there is one born every minute....Have fun
biggrin.gif
 
Bartman,
Im not gonna call you a liar but all i know is there is no way they can sell that cheap at the flea markets near you.
At least not the same knives. I have spent months locating the cheapest sources on these knives and i have by far not one wholesaler can even come close to the price ive found for these knives and there still would be no way for me to sell them at 6 or 8 dollars. In fact most people sell these same knives even in my market from $10-$20 dollars more than me per knife because i have found a cheaper source then them and that is why i sell so many more than them and that is why i am the most successful dealer in my market. Everyone who has bought one of these knives from me would say that it was worth the $20-$25.00 they paid for it i to this day have not had one complaint about the quality of any of these knives and i also back my product with an exchange if it becomes defective within a reasonable amount of time. To this day i still have not had to do an exchange. If you could provide proof that these people in your neck of the woods sell these knives that cheap at retail id surely be interested in obtaining that source i can only imagine what their wholesale prices would be and i'd surely be interested.
 
Suncruz...No offense..your knifes are probably better than these Miami imports...Check your email...best wishes
Bart
biggrin.gif
 
I'd like to say that none of my concerns pertain to quality and I hope they have not been misinterpreted as such.

It would almost be worse if a knife design was copied in a higher quality than the original. Imagine all the buyers a company would garner if they reproduced the CRK&T/Carson M-16 Series in Titanium instead of Zytel or aluminum. Even if they had to offer their knives at a higher price, say $100-$125, I think they'd draw many customers away from CRK&T. Furthermore, whether or not they drew away customers, taking the design would still be morally wrong.

I just wanted to be clear that my gripe with rip-off knives is not that they are inferior to the original (though they generally are) but that they represent a theft of intellectual property. This type of theft is difficult to guard against in any industry, but is especially bad for knife companies that are not in most cases large or with substantial budgets for legal matters. That is why we, as a community, must police the issue ourselves by refusing to purchase these knives.

Thank you.

------------------
-Drew Gleason
Little Bear Knives
 
Well said Corduroy!!!!Why else would a bear need a pocket...but to carry his SPYDERCO...
biggrin.gif
 
I don't think I agree with that, Corduroy. When there's a demand for a better quality version of a design, and the company that's making that design chooses not to meet that demand ... if the demand is big enough often someone else will. That's what happened with the Browning 1911, for instance: Colt refused to meet the demand for a better 1911 so other companies did it. Eventually Colt changed their minds and now they're playing catch-up....

That's happened in musical instruments many times -- somebody makes a basically good design but they don't execute the design with the kind of quality musicians want -- so somebody else does. You could tell musicians they're stealing ... but they have a living to make too, not to mention a desire to make good music ... they either buy good instruments, from whoever is willing to supply their needs, or the music would suffer.


A number of us, including me, have been practically begging Outdoor Edge to make a version of their Wedge in better steel. David Bloch, the company president, is active on these forums; he's aware there's a demand and he's chosen not to meet it -- a business decision which he is certainly entitled to make; he thinks there isn't enough demand to make it worth the company's while. Now if somebody else decides to meet that demand, would that be wrong? Would that hurt the consumer? Would it hurt Outdoor Edge? (Maybe it would, but they don't seem to think so ... and they've had plenty of chance to do it themselves....)

-Cougar Allen :{)
 
Cougar, that doesn't change who owns the design - intellectual property. If demand for the improved version is as great as you say and the original company simply can't make the improved version, it would certainly be profitable for someone else to pay royalties and produce it. If a company, for whatever reason, won't allow this even with royalties, that is their right - they own it.

Maybe it's not fair that they should hang onto their design and not allow it to be produced by someone else, even for royalties. Maybe it's not fair that you have a house while others live in boxes - but that doesn't mean that they have a right to steal your house or even to force you to sell it for a huge sum. It's all property in my mind.

I'd love to see a nicer Wedge, too. I'd also like to see CRK&T M-16s in Ti. But that's up to the companies that make them. Demand for something better does not mitigate their ownership - though it does point to a market opening for someone who can design another knife in that class without stealing. That's not very hard to do, honest! I have at least a dozen designs in the same class as the Wedge, for example, and all were done with no knowledge of that knife. Is original design really so hard that we must resort to theft?

-Drew
 
I will second suncruz prices on his knives. The Bm knockoffs go for between 20 to as high as 30 at flea markets, gun shows , car shows , etc. It depends on the state. If they are selling for 8 bucks I am sure they arent the kind suncruz is selling. These spike copies go for 20 bucks at Carolina gun shows and about the same price at West Virginia flea markets. But in unfriendly a`uto states, one can get more for them. The dealers are making, lets say, 10 bucks minumum a knife. Some people cant afford a nice US made auto and have to settle for knockoffs. But I do understand Corderoys concern about these knockoffs. Boker copies are strangely as good as the real Bokers,believe it or not. These Boker copies are the only ones I have seen of the knockoff autos that are similar to the originals. Just my two cents worth of phoney Reserve money.
 
"They own the design." That's not always clear.... Obviously if someone made an exact duplicate of the Wedge with the only difference being the steel -- nobody is going to do that; it would be illegal. Same for Fender guitars, Colt pistols, etc. Obviously no one can make an exact copy except for doing it better, not without paying royalties. Equally obviously, anyone could make a knife that would serve the same purposes as the Wedge out of better steel ... a knife that would perform in a similar way (but hold its edge better), be shaped in a similar way, even look roughly similar.... Things get iffy. Of course things get unclear with similar lower-quality, lower-priced products, too....

I think there's a difference between making a cheap junky knockoff and making a similar but better product.... Especially when consumers have been begging a manufacturer to do it themselves.... Seems to me there are two questions we have to ask when we consider whether a practice is ethical or not: 1 Does it hurt the consumer? 2 Does it hurt a patent or copyright or trademark holder, or someone who designed something even if it doesn't fit into one of those legally protected categories? (That hurts consumers, too, eventually, by discouraging innovation.)

Seems to me it would be pretty ingenuous for Fender to claim they're being abused by people making better guitars than they choose to make. Anyway they haven't complained. (Let's not get into whether the current legal owner of the Fender trademark has any right to call their products Fender guitars -- that's a can of worms in itself.) I doubt Outdoor Edge would complain if someone made a knife somewhat similar to the Wedge but of better steel since they've announced they have no intention of doing it themselves (of course an exact copy including the distinctive sheath look would be unconscionable, and illegal ... there's no need for that, though). David Bloch, are you reading this? I'd love to hear your comments.

Basically I think the law on copying a distinctive look of a product is good -- the only trouble is it's too expensive to enforce. If you look at the Harley-Davidson vs. Honda and the Glock vs. S&W decisions, that's good law; it protects originators. I guess what I'd like is for everybody to follow that law; I'd call that ethical behavior. If a similar product is similar enough to be covered by that law, even though it's higher-quality instead of a cheap knock-off, I would regard that as unethical too. Us consumers have to enforce that because the legal system is too expensive to do it for us.

For an example of what I consider unethical behavior, Ibanez musical instruments have a peculiarity about the trademark: if you look at an Ibanez acoustic guitar from a little distance that trademark sure looks like it says C. F. Martin ... you have to look close to realize it doesn't. Yet if you look at an Ibanez mandolin from a little distance, you'd swear it says Gibson.... They've been doing that for years and getting away with it, yet I think if the legal system weren't so expensive ... frankly I think it's illegal as well as unethical.

-Cougar Allen :{)
 
Cougar...now your talkin up my alley....Being a partime professional musician..I can surely relate to musical instruments with strings!!!
biggrin.gif
...BUT, musical instruments are way more complex than knives..Since no two guitars sound alike. Look at Sigma acoustics. They copied Martins exactly...Even the name on the headstock was written in the same decal design. Until you looked inside..Yikes. So Martin bought them out...Most guitar companies copied the Martin design...Martin gets credit for designing the dreadnaught but really didn't! They just produced it for another company (Ditson).. Any company that copies other peoples designs CHEAPLY, does it for only one reason..MONEY..A truely honest and sucessful company will change the design and build on their own reputation, ala Larrivee, Taylor, ect. Even Ibanez, Alvarez,(imports) realized early on making copies of Martins got them nowhere..It is always better to discover a design than to copy it. Look at Klien acoustics..Or look at the cheap CORT line, totally unique designs. Patents are very hard to get on musical instruments because they are not really mechanical. And design patents don't seem to last on instruments... Now the other thing that comes into play is when a design has a function and people start to think thats the way one should look, RE: F5 mandolin, or the A style mando...They just work better in that shape. But now most highend mando's are Loar designs...Everyone wants a F5 design...If a knife is made out of the same materials and the same design and costs the same, what then..Which will you buy?? Most buy the original design. What if someone has the same design but uses inferior materials, cheaper price, which will you buy?
Will you buy the Martin or the Ibanez? Would you buy the Ibanez if it cost the same as the Martin and it looked the same?It becomes a matter of the original design....This diverse subject comes up time and time..I say all things have a place, but lets support the originals not the copies!!!You can buy a nice Spyderco or Buck for the same price!!! Maybe Benchmade should buy Chinese knife factory too? And inspect the quality as Martin does with Sigma, or Ovation does with Takamine!!! Can't beat em join em....But then theres always the next guy waiting in the wing to steal your designs and just get by...Mass produce, sell cheap, and leave no heritage! Awh come on there just knives, tell that to the designer who created it!!!
Just my opinion....Bart


[This message has been edited by Bartman (edited 09 August 1999).]
 
The more I think about this the more confused I get. My arguments above seem to work just as well for cheap imitations -- there's a demand for an affordable version of the design, etc. I feel there's a difference but I'm having a hard time finding a rational reason for that feeling. Maybe I've been brainwashed by society into feeling the desires of people who want (or need) quality are more legitimate than the desires of people who want (or need) affordability. I have been thinking about this all day and now I don't know what I think.

I'll stick to what I said above about the HD vs. Honda and Glock vs. S&W cases being good guidelines. The problem remains that some cases are not even as clear as those two were. We can't refuse to buy knives that even vaguely resemble a prior design; neither can we ethically support design theft -- it's determining which is which that's difficult; there's a fuzzy area where it has to be a judgement call. Earlier today I thought it made a difference whether the second product is better or worse than the first ... now ... I'll have to think about it some more.

Bartman, the question I'm asking is not whether you'd buy a cheap knock-off instead of a good instrument -- it's whether you'd settle for a Stratocaster made by the legal owner of the Fender trademark and let your music suffer rather than buy a better one hand made by somebody else. Another question might be, do you want your favorite musicians to do that? Do you want to listen to music played on stock Fender Strats?

Although knives are less complicated they're not necessarily less important ... some people are trusting their lives to their knives.

-Cougar Allen :{)
 
A designer's work isn't simply sitting down and doodiling on paper. When the prototypes are done, the drawings are finalized and the product enters the marketplace succesfully a lot of effort and money has been expended. When some offshore company then uses that design to produce a copy or near-copy they're stealing all of the effort that made the original product work in our market without risking much of anything. That's theft of intellectual property!

If a company wants to make a variant on an existing product it's not difficult to make a deal with the designer or original manufacturer, compensating them for having "broken trail" already.

When knive made in "the worlds largest labor camp" enter this country they're offsetting the price for peoples' freedom. When they use designs already popular here they're stealing from the companies and makers that work to bring you good knives.

Sorry, but I'm a little sensitive to these sorts of question.

Take care,

Mike

------------------
TANSTAAFL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top