It's Official Cold Steel knocked off Brian Tighes design

sendec said:
Is he gonna do anything?
Click to expand...
Only he can.

And if his lawyer is good, we won't know: generally, in IP cases where a design was stolen, you may want to wait a while.

Let the knock-off gain some market popularity. The more it does, the more damage you can get.

Then, when the product line is established, and the "counterfeit" selling well, you hit them with the lawsuit. There are cases where companies have waited *years* before doing anything (Apple vs. Microsoft, for example).

Too soon, and it doesn't really penalize the offender much: they don't have a lot invested, and they can drop the product swiped from you and then move on to another.

There are of course a dozen strategies an IP attorney will use, but this is one popular one. And it frustrates people who like to see immediate action, but ultimately it can be more effective and more profitable to wait.
 
An interesting thing I noticed about cold steel is they have trademarked "San Mai Steel" which like "carbon V" can now mean anything they want it to.

Of course their orignial San Mai was something like 8a between 420 so it might not matter that much anyway.
 
Sad to see, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. Remember those Chinese-made SAK knockoffs Cold Steel produced a few years ago called Swiss Steel? They even had the nerve to put the Swiss cross on them. In my opinion, they started going downhill when they began cutting costs by switching production to Taiwan and using 420 steel on what where once decent knives. It wasn't all that long ago that Lynn Thompson was trashing Taiwan-made knives, 420 stainless steel and those wannabe Voyager knockoffs and now they're knocking off a Brian Tighe design. Very uncool. :barf:
 
FullerH said:
At the risk or restarting the sh*tstorm, this is really no worse than the BenchMade 630 Skirmish, IMO.
Click to expand...
i have to agree. permit me to veer a bit before making my point...

after a short-lived flurry of posts, the 630 "hole incident" seemed to fade away, with many folks brushing aside the clear patent violation (Sal himself has mentioned his dissatisfaction with BM over this). their reasoning "appeared" to be they weren't going to give up buying/owning BM's because they were of such high-quality, and people couldn't live without their designs.

i did not and will not buy the 630 from Benchmade, in spite of my fondness for its design. if, in the future they do right by Sal & Co. and offer to license the trademark, i will certainly buy one and support the design.

Cold Steel is basically doing the same thing but seems to be receiving much more flack due to their lower quality offerings and over-hyped marketing. does that make it fair? i don't know, but it seems a little hypocritical, IMO.

(i'm not calling anyone out!! -- i'm just comparing general opinion.)

abe
 
Well said allyourblood. Again, hope this settles between the 2 parties. Remember, we want to solve the issue, not just attack each other about their opinions on it
 
Guess I am a hypocrite b/c I don't see anything wrong with the BM 630. They even altered the original design to appease some knife manufactures
 
"Do I think Spyderco should be given credit for the hole? YES Just as Strider deserves credit for frame broiling Ti. Do I think the deserve financial compensation every time someone uses it? NO!!!! Does Michael Walker get money from Spyderco from their linerlock models? No... B/C he lacks a patent right? Or trademark. I don't want to get into a legal debate here."

Legal debate, no. There is nothing politically incorrect about your idea presented here, it just seems wrong. I would just suggest that your reasoning is completely flawed due to the fact that our economic backbone is predicated on the assumption of an innovation/risk/reward model, at the individual(small business) through to the corporate level.

Michael Walker showed lack of business acumen in not being able to get the LinerLock patented in time to make it a licensable commodity. If he was able to get .50 for each knife produced(which he should, imho), he would be very wealthy. That would not have been standing in the way of any progress.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
I understand my reasoning is flawed, but I just have a hard time with folks not being able to use a hole AKA lack of matter b/c someone filled out the paperwork and went the distance on this one. Is the hole innovative? I don't feel so. Once one hand opening folders became popluar, it was only a matter of time. :(
 
I just used the Walker lock as one small example. Mr. Walker gets the credit but if you look at where he got the idea in the first place you can find it in old electrcians knives with the little brass lock for the screwdriver with the word "PRESS" on it. Remember those?

So the idea in a sense was already out there, he just incorporated it into a knife with no back spring. Making a 'locking one hand operation folder' instead of a slip joint with a lock.

On the issue of copying and holding up the knife worlds progress. When the first Buffalo Skinner was made in the early years of our countries history it was copied immediately all over the nation by various manufacturers and black smiths alike. This design goes back every bit of 150 years ago. Some say it is nothing more than theft to copy a design. Others say once a new idea or design is created and 'put out there', it is fair game to make minor modifications to it to custom fit it to their own needs or wants and/or try to improve upon it. Apparently the law is in the favor of the latter. All it takes is certain little modifications and changes in aspects of the original idea and/or design and it is 'legal' to reproduce your copy because it is no longer a copy after the changes are made.

Whenever a new innovative design hits the market this happens no matter what it is. Right or wrong it happens. The Spyderco hole is one example of an innovative idea, simple as it may be, copied because it works and it sells. A Nesmuk knife is another and the Walker lock still another. This knife mentioned in this thread is just another in a long line of others copied by people and companies too numerous to mention.

If it disturbs you don't buy it. If it doesn't that is your call also. But, everyone of us is sitting at a keyboard and computer that has been copied and improved upon time and again. Like I said there is no stopping progress.

No one should be condemned for their opinion though. Live and let live as I always say.
 
can we just call them cold steal already? :D

Oh & for the sake of balance:


i read this somewhere, in some big thick book or something;

"There Is Nothing New under the Sun"
 
TBG: So then BM is holding up the progress in the knife world by daring to patent their axis lock, but that seems to be just fine by you?

Also, for the x-time, this is not a PATENT issue....it is a TRADEMARK issue.

And yes Mr. Walker DID get ripped off with his liner lock and yes, some companies like Spyderco did make sure that they had an agreement with Mr. Walker before they encorporated the lock in their designs.

Your arguments sound like it is ok to drive over a red light if you feel that the red light is were it isn't convenient to you and were you are of the opinion that there shouldn't be one.
 
Companies just come up with another version that is less effective. The Spyderco DoDo for example, like Sogs version it is less effective than the Axis lock.
 
That's the point, isn't it? So why didn't they come up with a different design of the hole? Why did it have to be round?
 
Why did it have to be round?
Click to expand...

B/C its supposed to be the production version of a Custom Skirmish, which has a hole. If they added some shape to the hole like all the others have, would that change your opinion about the 630?
 
Yes, it would. Same as BM has done on their AFCK, Gerber on their EZ-out's, and Spyderco did themselves for their Byrd line. The trademark is not about the function but about creating a certain look. And the fourth hole was apparently added because Ken Onion complained about the violation of his trademark. Btw. I am not sure whether Blackwood was ever licenced to use the hole. But I think there is a difference between a Custom maker who puts out a few knifes every year and a direct competitor using the same logo.

But I have to appologize, this was just my opinion, and I didn't mean to hijack this thread.
 
. I am not sure whether Blackwood was ever licenced to use the hole. But I think there is a difference between a Custom maker who puts out a few knifes every year and a direct competitor using the same logo.
Click to expand...

Your right. I guess in this case it comes down to if you think the hole should be trademarked. I think it was DaveH who said in the past that he wished people would just quit using the ovals and all that crap and just pay royalties to Spyderco b/c the rest are inferior. I will agree, that the Spyderco hole is definatly the most effective opening method and I just wish more companies would use it.
 
3 Points to make--

1) Blackwood did have permission for the round hole on his custom

2) I don't like Cold Steel's quality (Threw away my voyager)

3) LYNN SHOULD STOP WEARING SPANDEX SHORTS

-Thank you. Now I can get back to cooking dinner
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top