Emerson "Wave Shaped Feature" Announcement

[Riley12]

You know, I probably see myself owning one of those.

I still don't see that Emerson ever asked CM repeatedly to stop using the wave? From what I see, Matt was waving knives(which is really the best way to fast draw a folding knife IMO) and asked Ernie if he could officially use it, and was denied, and I can't find anywhere where Ernie had prior knowledge of Matt using the wave?
Don't get me wrong, I carry an Emerson daily, along with my recently acquired CM Ti Sidewalk Samurai, so I definitely don't hate Emerson, and I'm still gonna buy plenty more Emerson's.

 

[symphonyincminor]

Intellectual Property is something that should be defended at all costs. Keep up the excellent work, Mr. Emerson.

 

[Zemapeli]

[video=youtube;rgw26gQlQWw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgw26gQlQWw[/video]

You win.

Mike, are you keeping that handle? WHY DID YOU BREAK THAT KNIFE!!!? WHAT THE F***. If you aren't keeping that handle or blade, I would love to make a new blade for it and buy it up from you. Let me know - Zemapeli. Damnit CM.

 

[Charlie Mike]

Better start barking at Dalton too



I can guarantee that he will give 3 less poops than I do.

 

[Urban redneck]

I agree with the above statement, Emerson should worry more about fit and finish than about a guy selling his own property at a loss! Or better yet, concentrate on going after the Chinese that are copying your knives in they're entirety and pawning them off as an original! There's a worthy battle!

 

[Karda]

I agree with the above statement, Emerson should worry more about fit and finish than about a guy selling his own property at a loss! Or better yet, concentrate on going after the Chinese that are copying your knives in they're entirety and pawning them off as an original! There's a worthy battle!

The modification of ones own property isn't the issue, but rather the fact that items are sold using a feature that the individual has no permission to use at all and that becomes a selling point for the item....then the fact that the wave feature was being used, without permission or any type of consent and sold all over this forum and elsewhere, as a modification to knives it was never meant be on.

I highly doubt any of you would consent to another person using your property for their own gain without permission.

 

[plue]

For 5 years Charlie Mike helped himself to Emersons wave feature without repercussion.... offering his service all over the forum to make the wave mod as a knifemaking business and charging people money to do so. An act that helped him to build his business and reputation with no form whatsoever of compensation to Mr. Emerson or EKT.

....And Mr. Emerson is the bad guy for defending himself against such people?
Mr. Emerson is "Money Grubbing" because he feels that he should be compensated legally for the usage right of property he legally owns, but others feel they have the "right" to use for free without asking permission first ( not 5 yrs after the fact)?

If you want to blame someone for the wave feature being patented and trademarked, you should blame people like this who use it for their own benefit and purposes without permission, Not Mr. Emerson, who is legally obligated to defend his property right.

So I'm not really sure how to feel about this issue, but it seems like a bad outcome from the stance of knife lovers and the knife industry. What if thumb studs, flippers, frame locks, or any other idea we see commonly used was limited to certain producers? It certainly wouldn't make things as nice or interesting as they are now, would it? I just can't seem to give my support to Mr Emerson, he doesn't seem to give support back to the knife community, or he would IMHO make a better product.

 

[Karda]

So I'm not really sure how to feel about this issue, but it seems like a bad outcome from the stance of knife lovers and the knife industry. What if thumb studs, flippers, frame locks, or any other idea we see commonly used was limited to certain producers? It certainly wouldn't make things as nice or interesting as they are now, would it? I just can't seem to give my support to Mr Emerson, he doesn't seem to give support back to the knife community, or he would IMHO make a better product.

The quality of Emersons product isn't the issue here. Its nothing more than deflection.
The issue is whether or not individuals have the right to use a patented and trademarked feature as their own without permission or prior approval.
The law says " No"

 

[plue]

The quality of Emersons product isn't the issue here. Its nothing more than deflection.
The issue is whether or not individuals have the right to use a patented and trademarked feature as their own without permission or prior approval.
The law says " No"

I only mentioned the quality as why I personally do not support him, which I agree is of no consequence to the argument but does provide background for my opinion as well in a friendly discussion. You did miss my other remark addressing this being a negative blow to the knife community though.

 

[Karda]

I only mentioned the quality as why I personally do not support him, which I agree is of no consequence to the argument but does provide background for my opinion as well in a friendly discussion. You did miss my other remark addressing this being a negative blow to the knife community though.

Didn't miss it at all. I dismissed it as your opinion.
My opinion is that the acknowledgement of a persons property rights, legally and otherwise, helps the knife community. What reason would there be to innovate features such as this if every tom, dick or charlie can come along and use it without giving the innovator the slightest bit of credit or compensation?

 

[weinerd]

The modification of ones own property isn't the issue,

There's no "fair use" provision in patent law. Making/using someone else's patented invention, even for personal use, still constitutes infringement of the patent.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

There's no "fair use" provision in patent law. Making/using someone else's patented invention, even for personal use, still constitutes infringement of the patent.

That's not entirely accurate.

 

[weinerd]

That's not entirely accurate.

In what way? "whoever without authority makes, uses ... any patented invention ... during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent."

 

[Zero_Time]

Nope, never claimed any such title just made a comment based on personal perspective, kind of like you're doing.
If it's his own personal user that he paid for and decided to modify, who is to say how far he can go with said mods and how he can eventually dispose of it?

First, I offered no "opinion". I asked questions out loud, but did NOT say it was legally sound to follow.

Second, IP law is very difficult, but what you're saying sounds like pretty clear infringement, so I was calling you out for what sounded like literally calling for unambiguous lawbreaking.

Mr. Emerson is "Money Grubbing" because he feels that he should be compensated legally for the usage right of property he legally owns, but others feel they have the "right" to use for free without asking permission first ( not 5 yrs after the fact)?

Did Mr. Emerson offer CM a chance to continue modding with a royalty payment, or did he tell CM it wasn't cool under any circumstance? Both are legal, and Mr. Emerson has every right to do as he pleases with his IP. However, I didn't jump into this thread cheering because while I respect Mr. Emerson, his past, his knives, his designs, and the rest, I'm not personally a fan of IP being used to shut down people who use it- maybe channel it or make them pay a royalty, but I like the idea of continued innovation.

The modification of ones own property isn't the issue, but rather the fact that items are sold using a feature that the individual has no permission to use at all and that becomes a selling point for the item....then the fact that the wave feature was being used, without permission or any type of consent and sold all over this forum and elsewhere, as a modification to knives it was never meant be on.

I highly doubt any of you would consent to another person using your property for their own gain without permission.

The quality of Emersons product isn't the issue here. Its nothing more than deflection.
The issue is whether or not individuals have the right to use a patented and trademarked feature as their own without permission or prior approval.
The law says " No"

Right- and some of the issue may be that Mr. Emerson has NO price for the royalty to pay to him- he simply doesn't want anyone to modify any knives for sale with a wave feature.

As I said above, that's totally legal under his patent, and I don't argue it isn't legal. However, I DO argue it isn't in the consumer's interest.

Also:

There's no "fair use" provision in patent law. Making/using someone else's patented invention, even for personal use, still constitutes infringement of the patent.

That's not entirely accurate.

Oh, please show me a link! There's an exemption for testing, but please, point out the personal use exemption.

Zero

 

[whateatsrabbits]

So I'm not really sure how to feel about this issue, but it seems like a bad outcome from the stance of knife lovers and the knife industry. What if thumb studs, flippers, frame locks, or any other idea we see commonly used was limited to certain producers? It certainly wouldn't make things as nice or interesting as they are now, would it?

Exactly how I feel.

Jake hoback did it right with his HRD, he said its free for anyone to use his design, just give him credit. There's a man who want the knife industry to evolve and grow.

 

[blade dude]

i dont see how it was a problem for cm, emerson trademarked or whatever the WAVE opening feature, the one in the video doesnt look anything like a wave so unless emerson patented "and extrusion from a knife blade that catches on pocket thus causing knife to deploy while removal from pocket" i would think you just cant shape it like a wave am i right or did i miss something?

 

[weinerd]

so unless emerson patented "and extrusion from a knife blade that catches on pocket thus causing knife to deploy while removal from pocket"

LOL that's more or less what he patented right there...
"The projection is configured so as to catch on a container, such as a pants pocket, holster or the like, as the knife is withdrawn from the container to pivot the blade about the hinge to the extended position for use. Thus, the knife can be opened with one hand without any special manipulation of the knife."

 

[Insipid Moniker]

In what way? "whoever without authority makes, uses ... any patented invention ... during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent."

You can make an exact replica for research purposes, you can use the patented device as long as it is materially different and the concept of modifying an existing product to replicate utility gets around it because you're offering a service, not a product.

 

[Urban redneck]

There's no "fair use" provision in patent law. Making/using someone else's patented invention, even for personal use, still constitutes infringement of the patent.

So by definition, the zip tie through the Spydie hole trick is patent infringement?? Not trying to be snarky, don't really know much about patent laws

 

[blade dude]

LOL that's more or less what he patented right there...
"The projection is configured so as to catch on a container, such as a pants pocket, holster or the like, as the knife is withdrawn from the container to pivot the blade about the hinge to the extended position for use. Thus, the knife can be opened with one hand without any special manipulation of the knife."

So we design one that catches but needs slight manipulation and we are in the clear as that would no longer be what he patented.