Is the Benchmade opening hole wrong?

The CBBL may look SIMILAR to the axis lock.
But it is very different.
It was made to be a strong lock that you have to use two fingers to disengage(so you don't have your fingers in the way of the blade). It's also not used to flick the blade open like a lot of Axis lock knives are.
It is much tougher than the axis lock in my opinion.

As far as the thumb hole. They got permission, no it's not wrong.
Should they give credit? Sure.
Should all companies that use an idea of someone else's give credit? Yes, it's not just Benchmade.

Should all Frame Locks be called "Reeve Integral Lock" when advertising that's the lock used on a knife in a catalog or something?
Darn Skippy they should.

"Frame Lock" is kind of a simpler way to put it and is used by people who buy and don't make knives.
 
loonybin said:
The Axis lock is patented, the SpyderHole is not. Spyderco using an Axis lock without a license would be illegal. I think it would be awesome if they did license it, though.


Nowhere close. Very different design. The Ball Bearing Lock is close. Spyderco needs to use it on more knives so they have more ambidextrous knives (says this lefty).


That means nothing. The people at the patent office know so little about the things they patent that they grant patents for things that are almost identical. Things that are incredibly similar and almost identical can still get patented, even if one steals the idea from another. The archery world is a perfect example of this as there are two patents for a two-track binary cam system that are almost identical, yet one guy stole a lot of his idea from the other guy (who stole from who is still up for argument between the two guys -- they're both arrogant @#&$es).
Click to expand...

You know ... I keep writing compression lock when I mean bbl. Thanks for not bashing me though, some people would have taken advantage of that type-o and assumed gross ignorance. :)

Well, a lot of you have made some very good points. I'm still not sure where I stand. All I know is that I love both companies, and as silly as it may sound a little asterisk mentioning Sal in Benchmades literature would go a long way toward putting this to rest once and for all. And if they did how could it possibly hurt? Most people, other than the ones who care in the first place, have no idea who Sal is.
 
Strigamort said:
You know ... I keep writing compression lock when I mean bbl.
Click to expand...

Quoted from the 2013 Spyderco catalog p. 69:
"BALL BEARING LOCK A patented compressive lock that ... ".

And BTW I've never studied the bolt action lock but at least from the diagram in the catalog it could be considered a compressive lock too.
 
bh49 said:
I have no doubts. The companies reached "agreement" after, not before Vex came out.
Click to expand...

IIRC my AFCK's with holes are over 15 years old.


xander99 said:
In my eyes there is no right or wrong "hole" there is spyderco that made it first and made it better, but there is no set standard of hole. I do prefer spyderco's hole more!
Click to expand...

A LOT of knife manufacturers use blade holes that aren't round. I thought that was to either get around the patent or at least not look like they copied it blatantly. In my collection I have Gerbers and Leathermans with oblong holes. (I dont count Byrd since they are owned by Spyderco.)
 
I think that considering that they only use it on 2 knives (that I can think of) the grip and the skirmish.
1. For the sheeps foot grip it IMO could be used in wet conditions fishing/boating where the hole is better than a thumb stud because it easy to use with wet Hands.
2. As for the skirmish it ads to the knifes look it wouldn't be half as cool of a knife without them.

Just my $0.02 on the subject .
 
knife2Agunfight said:
I don't think that it's wrong. All they did was come up for an alternative to a thumbstud. For some reason the Spyderhole is Spyderco's trademark and it has to be on all of their knives; even though it literally ruins the design of some knives. I feel that if the creator of the Spyderhole really cared about knife making, that they would let anyone use their method, but they'd want credit for creating it.
Click to expand...

The Spyderhole was created before the thumbstud. The Spyderco Worker, released in 1981, was the first "modern" folder.
And Sal Glesser does exactly what you stated. Plenty of custom knives have Spyderholes on them. I've never heard of him not allowing someone to use it if they asked.
 
bh49 said:
I have no doubts. The companies reached "agreement" after, not before Vex came out.
Click to expand...
Umm... Benchmade has been using a hole in the blade for many years. The AFCK and mini-AFCK made in the late 1990s had a round hole in the blade. Looooong before the Vex.

9blades said:
I think that considering that they only use it on 2 knives (that I can think of) the grip and the skirmish.
Click to expand...
550 & 555 Griptilian/mini, 741 & 746 Onslaught/mini, Bone Collector Axis folders, Pika & mini-Pika
past: AFCK & mini-AFCK, 806 AFCK (not the D2 version), Vex, 630/635 Skirmish/mini

At one point, I preferred the hole for opening, but as I gained more Axis locks and realized that I don't need the hole to open the knife and I can flip one open faster with a thumbstud, I have moved away from them. Now I only have one knife with a hole in it -- my left-handed mini-AFCK.
 
bdmicarta said:
Quoted from the 2013 Spyderco catalog p. 69:
"BALL BEARING LOCK A patented compressive lock that ... ".

And BTW I've never studied the bolt action lock but at least from the diagram in the catalog it could be considered a compressive lock too.
Click to expand...

Looney (logically) assumed that I was refering to the lock style that the paramilitary 2 uses. I meant to write ball bearing lock.

Some writer I am... :o
 
BladeChick777 said:
The CBBL may look SIMILAR to the axis lock.
But it is very different.
It was made to be a strong lock that you have to use two fingers to disengage(so you don't have your fingers in the way of the blade). It's also not used to flick the blade open like a lot of Axis lock knives are.
It is much tougher than the axis lock in my opinion.

As far as the thumb hole. They got permission, no it's not wrong.
Should they give credit? Sure.
Should all companies that use an idea of someone else's give credit? Yes, it's not just Benchmade.

Should all Frame Locks be called "Reeve Integral Lock" when advertising that's the lock used on a knife in a catalog or something?
Darn Skippy they should.

"Frame Lock" is kind of a simpler way to put it and is used by people who buy and don't make knives.
Click to expand...

Thank you BC, your posts are always insightful. :)

Just one thing (and this is purely to sate my curiousity)... how did you know that Benchmade secured permission to use the hole design?
 
loonybin said:
Umm... Benchmade has been using a hole in the blade for many years. The AFCK and mini-AFCK made in the late 1990s had a round hole in the blade. Looooong before the Vex.
Click to expand...

The round opening hole used on the older AFCK was licensed from Spyderco, but the license ended and Benchmade switched to their own oval opening hole (like on my 806D2, which is one of my absolute favorite knives of all time). I've heard lots of stories as to why BM stopped licensing the round opening hole and I'm not sure which one is correct (I'm sure the facts are stated here on BF somewhere).

To the topic in general:

For me personally, I will never own a Benchmade with a round opening hole until an amicable agreement has been made public. And that simply hasn't happened yet. If you research the topic, you will find that at some point, Sal basically stated something to the effect of, "Spyderco and Benchmade have reached an agreement", but he won't specify the details. That isn't enough to convince me that the deal is honorable and fair to both parties, and I'm certain it's not. Until Sal goes on record saying as much, I'll stay away from any BM knife that steps on Spyderco's trademark (whether it's enforceable or not).

It comes down to this: the round opening hole is unquestionably associated with Spyderco knives -- almost entirely so (until recently). Whether it can be defended in court doesn't matter to me -- it's established and they've made it their own for decades. The knife industry is shockingly small and tightly-knit, and the huge manufacturers rub elbows constantly, year after year. For another company to come along and use it when there are numerous other solutions that are just as effective (BM used to be pretty proud of their oval opening hole, if I recall) appears to me, as disrespectful.

Other people can buy them, and I won't think any less of them. These types of situations don't amount to a hill of beans to a lot of folks, and I understand and accept that. I don't profess to know all the inner workings of every company nor their legal dealings with one another. I only know that Benchmade could've done just about anything other than putting a round opening hole on some of their knives and people would still buy and appreciate them, never questioning their functionality. But they chose to use Spyderco's most iconic symbol (even more so than the "bug") without ever giving credit or receiving any sort of official "blessing" (at least, not any that Sal was comfortable enough offering up in a public space). That speaks volumes to me and I will continue to vote "nay" with my dollars.
 
Some of the posters in this thread REALLY need to bone up on their history.

Spyderco patented and trademarked the round opening hole. Patents are only good for a certain number of years. The patent has expired. However, the trademark can, and has been renewed. For those that say "you can't patent a hole", well Spyderco did. For those that say "you can't trademark a hole", well, Spyderco did, and those people also need to take a closer look at a Coke bottle or a John Deere tractor, because that shape of bottle and that exact shade of green are trademarked. The round opening hole, and indeed the round hole in general (they put it even on their fixed blades), is iconic of Spyderco, as much as their bug logo is. Of course, a round hole somewhere on a knife isn't exclusive to Spyderco, but the round opening hole is, and is recognized as such by the government of the United States of America.

Benchmade's use of the round opening hole is long and confusing, and frankly, nobody really knows all the details except Spyderco and Benchmade themselves. First there was the 806 AFCK, which began with an round opening hole, but then went to an ovoid hole. Then came the Pika and the Blackwood 630/635 (I don't know which came first). The issue with the 630 was that it was based on Neil Blackwood's custom knife, which featured the trademarked Spyderco opening hole. There was a big clusterfornication about the whole thing, but in the end, Spyderco and Benchmade came to an agreement, and Benchmade is now allowed to use the round opening hole on their knives. The details are between them. But suffice to say that Benchmade is legally using the trademarked Spyderco round opening hole, and any possible wrongdoings on BM's part are in the past and everything now is on the up-and-up.
 
Hmm... well, there is no Benchmade forum here, thus no company rep that I am aware of.

Maybe I should ask on the companies forum, of which I am a member. It may not go over well though.
 
Strigamort said:
Hmm... well, there is no Benchmade forum here, thus no company rep that I am aware of.

Maybe I should ask on the companies forum, of which I am a member. It may not go over well though.
Click to expand...

Do a search first. It has probably already been asked, multiple times. And probably not answered, since BM doesn't really even participate in their own forum.

As I said though, everything now is on the up-and-up, as far as we know. Others in this thread have addressed their concerns on this issue, and you're entitled to make your decisions based on what you've read. Whatever happened, everything now is legal. As far as right or wrong, you'll have to make your own choice.
 
Planterz said:
Do a search first. It has probably already been asked, multiple times. And probably not answered, since BM doesn't really even participate in their own forum.

As I said though, everything now is on the up-and-up, as far as we know. Others in this thread have addressed their concerns on this issue, and you're entitled to make your decisions based on what you've read. Whatever happened, everything now is legal. As far as right or wrong, you'll have to make your own choice.
Click to expand...

Sound advice. :thumbup:
 
I was just thinking about this earlier today. I bought the benchmade bone collector 15030 because I wanted something close to the spyderco as my first venture into benchmade. Let me tell you I love the axis lock. I was thinking how awesome it would be to have a spyderco with the axis lock. Like the manix 3 ;).
 
For the record, function cannot be trademarked, so a round opening hole cannot be trademarked. A round hole in a specific location on a knifeblade can be and is in fact a registered trademark of Spyderco Inc. That's why it now appears on fixed blades where it serves no other function, it is simply a logo like the bug mark. Why didn't Sal protect his trademark more strongly? Maybe because Benchmade is a company about four times the size of Spyderco, with four times as much money to pay lawyers in a court battle. You can't win in civil court if your funds can't go the distance. Welcome to reality.

The earlier round hole Benchmade were licensed from Spyderco, and that was acknowledged on the box. The license was canceled by Sal because Benchmade "did not acknowledge the license to a sufficient degree". I was not privy to the details, but I believe that Benchmade was supposed to have marked the blades to reflect that license, just as Spyderco marks their blades using Emerson waves, and they did not do so. That was while the patent was still in effect, so it was a somewhat different situation from a legal standpoint. The current agreement between the companies was arrived at after the introduction of the Vex, not before. That alone is sufficient for me to no longer buy Benchmade products.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top