Just ordered a Ganzo g710

[marcinek]

Honestly I've never owned nor used a Benchmade, and I'm not a fan of the axis lock in general. the Ganzo axis lock is reliable, but obviously will fail at batoning just like any liner and frame lock. from what most people say, Ganzo axis locks are more stiff than Benchmades.

Welp. Clearly you don't include "morality/theft/counterfeiting" as one of the factors in comparing knives. That certainly is your prerogative. It seems that many here, including myself, and, apparently "the management," do.

What is that quote...dont know if I have it exactly and can remember whose it was...

"There are a few thousand men who can live without relying on the general standards that prevail in everyday life, but the rest can not do so."

 

[HappyDaddy]

My final thought on the switchblade issue is this: The law says what it says. Dealers are doing what they do, and are presumably comfortable with their business practices. Nothing good can come from further discussion of the statute.

 

[Hackenslash]

HS - Ok so stealing a design to use on a different thing is called innovation. So you are saying that it's ok? It seems many argue that stealing a design or even being heavily influenced is legal in other countries but immoral to support. Using the designs and elements I mentioned is legal but should also be looked at the same way. New companies producing designs they did not invent. In 30 years, will every knife company have free range to copy Benchmade and Spydercos and be in the legal and moral right? And my real experience in handling knockoffs is not subject to opinion. It is what it is. The people who keep buying $20 knives are not the ones who would drop $100+ anyway. People I have met that say they collect knives are either high end collectors or they just have a bucket of flea market knives. I don't see anything in between.

Ok, I'll try one more time to contrast your argument with a series of four questions you can ask about any knife to help understand it's current status as "protected" or "open market" (I just made those terms up to help with the contrast, they're not official)
1. Who is the designer?
2. Who is the original manufacturer?
3. Is the knife still made at #2?
4. Does the knife contain contain any patented or licensed features?

Now let's answer those question about two different knives. First, the subject of this discussion, the Benchmade 950 Rift
1. Warren Osborne
2. Benchmade Knife Company, Oregon City OR
3. Currently still in production as of 10/31/2016
4. Yes, the licensed Axis Lock, currently under patent protection until mid-2017 (at the earliest to the best of our non-legal analysis)

Now, let's do the same exercise with a Sowbelly Stockman,
1. Unknown, probably a fusion of several popular ideas, in fact collectors refer to it as part of the "Stockman Pattern Group".
2. Unknown.
3. Due to #2 being undetermined, the only correct answer here can be "NO"
4. No

There you go. I, and most enthusiasts here at BF, would consider the 950 Rift to be a "protected" knife and the Sowbelly Stockman to be an "open market" knife. I hope from this exercise you can see the difference between the two.

There's only one "open market" knife that I think kinda supports your viewpoint; the Buck 110. It's been around since 1963, but you could offer an affirmative answer for 3 out of the 4 questions. I think it sucks that it's been so copied but all I can rightfully do about it is grumble and choose to not buy a clone without condemning the clones. After 50 years, I may feel the same way about copies of the 950 Rift. Check with me then...

 

[Larcivs Lepidvs]

Really? What testing media did you use? What was your control protocol? I assume the edge angle and thickness behind the edge was identical on all knives tested, right?

Hahaha yeah sure! because when any normal person uses his knife for daily tasks makes sure to follow a "protocol" beforehand... and if not, he can't do comparisons with other knives he used

 

[JupiterPaladin]

My point was that it seems to be ok to steal a design if it's been out for a long time and I feel that like you, people should refuse to buy the copies. The Kabar 1912 and Buck 110 are copied by hundreds currently. I would expect anybody deriding Ganzo for making copies to also not own copies of those 2 as their original design companies are still producing. I'm just looking for consistency here. Yes the slip joint designs I mentioned are so old and little is known, but the point was that the current companies making them did not design them so it's lazy design theft on their part, even if it's legal.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

Hahaha yeah sure! because when any normal person uses his knife for daily tasks makes sure to follow a "protocol" beforehand... and if not, he can't do comparisons with other knives he used

You sure as hell can't make reliable statements about steels that are that close in terms of performance without that, particularly since others have chimed in and said the exact opposite. You're just assuming, based on your limited experience, that a company that has displayed no integrity whatsoever in several areas is to be believed in others. That's fine for you, but if you expect to convince me that they're using the materials they claim to use you better bring a whole lot more objective evidence to the table.

 

[craytab]

Honestly I've never owned nor used a Benchmade, and I'm not a fan of the axis lock in general. the Ganzo axis lock is reliable, but obviously will fail at batoning just like any liner and frame lock. from what most people say, Ganzo axis locks are more stiff than Benchmades.

So you have no experience of what you are talking about. Classic counterfeit supporter. :thumbup:

Maybe throw out some more r-bombs or silly blasts to prove your point some more.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

My point was that it seems to be ok to steal a design if it's been out for a long time and I feel that like you, people should refuse to buy the copies. The Kabar 1912 and Buck 110 are copied by hundreds currently. I would expect anybody deriding Ganzo for making copies to also not own copies of those 2 as their original design companies are still producing. I'm just looking for consistency here. Yes the slip joint designs I mentioned are so old and little is known, but the point was that the current companies making them did not design them so it's lazy design theft on their part, even if it's legal.

It was just explained why it is totally consistent to both deride Ganzo and own a USMC fighting knife or stockman. Hell, if you actually bothered to read the thread prior to this you would see that I've repeatedly said that I think after time has passed and a person or company has made money from their innovation that the entire community should benefit from it. It is not at all inconsistent to simultaneously hold those positions.

 

[JupiterPaladin]

IM - I did read but thanks. It looks like you missed the point and that I was responding to HackenSlash. The 1912 is still being produced by the original manufacturer. At what point is it ok to steal the design?

 

[Insipid Moniker]

IM - I did read but thanks. It looks like you missed the point and that I was responding to HackenSlash. The 1912 is still being produced by the original manufacturer. At what point is it ok to steal the design?

The original 1219C2 was made by Camillus, at least the first run was. It was also manufactured for the military by Union Cutlery, Robeson and PAL. It was produced by multiple companies basically immediately after being designed and that has continued to this day. It was never a knife design that was recognized as being exclusive to any manufacturer.

 

[JupiterPaladin]

So if that's the case we should boycott Kabar?

 

[Insipid Moniker]

So if that's the case we should boycott Kabar?

Kabar was Union Cutlery at the time and was also contracted to produce the knife in the early 1940s.

 

[sabre cat]

(quoting sabrecat and Inspid Moniker) I really don't understand you. Here's what I paid for those: (knifecenter was the seller)

KaBar Dozier - $20
Byrd Cara Cara 2- $21
Byrd Robin 2 - $18
KaBar Piggyback - $19

and what I paid for my Ganzos is $13-15 for each one, so I guess I didn't say anything wrong?

Nope, I ask a question and you answered. Were good.

 

[JupiterPaladin]

Ok. So you correct me but then say they had the contract to produce. Cool. But at what point does it switch from wrong to copy and harmful to the knife community to being ok to copy so the industry can benefit? Do people ever think how silly it sounds? Literally there has to be a deadline making it wrong one day and beneficial the next...

 

[Larcivs Lepidvs]

So you have no experience of what you are talking about. Classic counterfeit supporter. [emoji106]

Maybe throw out some more r-bombs or silly blasts to prove your point some more.

I was always talking of steels and general use. not of axis lock or benchmade comparisons. to be more specific: spyderco ambitious and tenacious, ontario rat 1 and 2, cold steel medium voyager aus-8, kabar dozier, brk zancudo.
Also I have to say that I don't own any Ganzo as of now, because I didn't like the weight.

 

[Hackenslash]

My point was that it seems to be ok to steal a design if it's been out for a long time and I feel that like you, people should refuse to buy the copies. The Kabar 1912 and Buck 110 are copied by hundreds currently. I would expect anybody deriding Ganzo for making copies to also not own copies of those 2 as their original design companies are still producing. I'm just looking for consistency here. Yes the slip joint designs I mentioned are so old and little is known, but the point was that the current companies making them did not design them so it's lazy design theft on their part, even if it's legal.

Well, I guess I'm mostly consistent then. My only "110" is a Buck 50th Anniversary model. I had one years ago when I was a kid and I'm not sure if that one was real or not. It's at the bottom of a pond somewhere at this point, or what's left of it.
I gave my wife a genuine Ka-Bar Fighting knife a couple of years ago for Christmas. Yeah, she's that kind of girl. That's the only one I've ever bought.
I do have a bunch of Rough Riders, but as you just said, the classic slip joint styles are really a different animal.

I agree, if we had fewer lazy designs it would insure that we'd have more, different knives. From that standpoint, we all lose. Imagine Ganzo making original knives that offered new looks and choices to a waiting world!

<insert angelic choir and beams of blinding light>

 

[JupiterPaladin]

They offer some original looking autos. Not sure anybody has found them as stolen designs anyway. Lucky your wife appreciates a good blade. My wife likes stupid little Frost keychain knives.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

Ok. So you correct me but then say they had the contract to produce. Cool. But at what point does it switch from wrong to copy and harmful to the knife community to being ok to copy so the industry can benefit? Do people ever think how silly it sounds? Literally there has to be a deadline making it wrong one day and beneficial the next...

Why does it sound silly? What, exactly, is silly about it? Any length of time picked is, indeed, going to be somewhat arbitrary, but that doesn't make holding the view that people deserve credit and reward for their ideas and innovations, but that those innovations shouldn't be kept from broader production forever inconsistent or silly.

 

[robgmn]

Attacking me, and not the argument. Watch yourself, pal, you might earn a chicklet.

In the case in question, the guy imported switchblades. That is illegal. You found some random case about switchblades and the guy was found guilty, so you assume switchblades are illegal. Get your facts straight.

Now THAT right there is some funny stuff!!
"some random case about switchblades and the guy was found guilty (some random case of the US Gov't vs. some random guy selling switchblades).

I suppose if I found "some random case" about someone being sued for patent infringement and losing, you'd say I'm "assuming" patent infringement is illegal.
Perhaps RoadsideImports LLC vs. Benhmade Knife Co. is random enough for you? Civil Case No. CV 08-00967-HA
Despite Benchmade's win, I guess it's just assumption that patent infringement is illegal. You've just invalidated the whole argument that Ganzo infringes on a patent by using the "Axis lock" in a knife they produce and selling it in the US.

Even though a lawsuit and subsequent decision confirms the illegality of it (a. Mentor’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,550,832 and 6,675,484 are valid and infringed by Defendants; b. Mentor’s U.S. Patent No. 5,822,866 is valid and infringed by Defendants; c. Defendants are ENJOINED from further infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,550,832, 6,675,484 and 5,822,866; d. Defendants have infringed Benchmade’s trademarks BENCHMADE® and BENCHMITE® under 15 U.S.C. § 1114 and under the common law you claim a "random" lawsuit decision has no bearing on the legality.
Good argument!

You are quite the comedian!

 

[Hackenslash]

Now THAT right there is some funny stuff!!
"some random case about switchblades and the guy was found guilty (some random case of the US Gov't vs. some random guy selling switchblades).

I suppose if I found "some random case" about someone being sued for patent infringement and losing, you'd say I'm "assuming" patent infringement is illegal.
Perhaps RoadsideImports LLC vs. Benhmade Knife Co. is random enough for you? Civil Case No. CV 08-00967-HA
Despite Benchmade's win, I guess it's just assumption that patent infringement is illegal. You've just invalidated the whole argument that Ganzo infringes on a patent by using the "Axis lock" in a knife they produce and selling it in the US.

Even though a lawsuit comfirms the illegality of it, you claim the lawsuit decision has no bearing on the legality.
Good argument!

You are quite the comedian!

Ok, I'm not too proud to admit you've lost me and I no longer have any idea what you're really saying. Maybe try writing real slow for those of us who don't read good (but want to do other things good too) ?