Maxace IP Theft Claim

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't like copying of any kind to profit off of others. I'm not suggesting this is okay in any capacity be it legal or not. It's just wrong to copy and also wrong if you find out it is and keep making them. My main problem with this subject though is maxace went after social media and overall just went about it wrong. And he's well known for making clones before.

I assume honeybadger went to an oem who's got some designs they are using the base of and that so happens to be a similar copy of the maxace balance (like how automakers use a similar chassis for many models but all the other things are different, iirc the Ruike p801 sub chassis is the senmenru Land sebenza copy). It's debatable if the US company that sells the honeybadger even knew.

They seemed to try to make it into there own design language, not trying to mimic something else. But pretty sure the oem supplied the base knife. But China doesn't care about copying other factories overall, but especially not caring about copying products in there homeland. That's why I think Maxace is going after the honey badger and not the manufacturer in china, cause he has no grounds to go after them in China. I doubt he can go after the company due to the laws in general about this sort of thing. Heck he'd have to prove he designed that knife, which could be difficult. so he's left to just try and bad mouth the model and say I was here first. Not to mention any press, be it good or bad is a good thing to bring attention to your brand name.

There's other sides to this that we just don't know. I don't know how innocent the US company making the honeybadgers is. They can play the I didn't know card, but I know id want to research if it was a clone to begin with before selling it. But some new companies are obvious to things like this.

goldie said:
It is relevant; the honey badger is a piece of crap; who cares who rips off that gas station tin can
Click to expand...

I'm not much for the design in either direction. I find the MA balance a bit interesting with its g10 side bearing race that connects to the lockbar. Don't see that often.
 
IP protection is not some inherent human right

There is nothing immoral about ignoring claims of IP

Americans didn't care about IP law for much of our history. It's an indication capital has captured the state on this issue. Nothing more.

IP laws are not good for the consumer nor innovation. I have no reason to innovate when I have a monopoly provided to me by IP laws limiting my competition.

Authors have no inherent right to profit off their words if some one else can. If I had a printing press in 1600 I wasn't gonna send machiavelli's estate a cut of my earnings. That was always how things were done until we the western states INVENTED the concept of IP. Suggested by lawyers no doubt.

To bring morality into the discussion is absurd. There is nothing immoral about taking some one's idea for your own.
 
BigWillie said:
IP protection is not some inherent human right

There is nothing immoral about ignoring claims of IP

Americans didn't care about IP law for much of our history. It's an indication capital has captured the state on this issue. Nothing more.

IP laws are not good for the consumer nor innovation. I have no reason to innovate when I have a monopoly provided to me by IP laws limiting my competition.

Authors have no inherent right to profit off their words if some one else can. If I had a printing press in 1600 I wasn't gonna send machiavelli's estate a cut of my earnings. That was always how things were done until we the western states INVENTED the concept of IP. Suggested by lawyers no doubt.

To bring morality into the discussion is absurd. There is nothing immoral about taking some one's idea for your own.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. I work in a highly competitive, highly technical field and innovation is thriving more than ever and it is largely driven by IP. The consumer is getting great product because companies can find new innovative methodologies and place them under a veil of protection for their efforts.

And that's a global perspective by the way.
 
The deeper discussion on intellectual property rights is interesting. The particular situation that sparked this thread is mostly interesting for its absurdity. I've only seen the pictures posted here but as others have mentioned, these two knives look less similar to each other than each does to other knives. If this is taken seriously, what will that mean for other knife makers moving forward?
 
Eli Chaps said:
I couldn't disagree more. I work in a highly competitive, highly technical field and innovation is thriving more than ever and it is largely driven by IP. The consumer is getting great product because companies can find new innovative methodologies and place them under a veil of protection for their efforts.

And that's a global perspective by the way.
Click to expand...

You would just have a different monetization model

Of course you make your money from IP you play with what you're given.

I'm not saying massive value woudln't be sucked out of the economy if we just ended all IP protections tomorrow. But I am saying consumers would be a lot better off had we never had any IP protections at all. Only consumer protections.
 
I believe actual counterfeits are harmful to both the end consumer and the brand names that they misappropriate . No question ! :mad::thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

Copying ...depends , for me ,whether or not someone is really being damaged . Very hard for me to imagine exactly how $20 Ganzos etc are truly hurting BM , Spyderco , Lion Steel etc . Customers who want and can afford the genuine are hardly going to settle for a cheap branded clone ! o_O

Also , IP theft is only meaningful if supported by the official determination of some legal authority that has jurisdiction . Otherwise , it's just a matter of personal opinion . :confused:
 
BigWillie said:
IP protection is not some inherent human right

There is nothing immoral about ignoring claims of IP

Americans didn't care about IP law for much of our history. It's an indication capital has captured the state on this issue. Nothing more.

IP laws are not good for the consumer nor innovation. I have no reason to innovate when I have a monopoly provided to me by IP laws limiting my competition.

Authors have no inherent right to profit off their words if some one else can. If I had a printing press in 1600 I wasn't gonna send machiavelli's estate a cut of my earnings. That was always how things were done until we the western states INVENTED the concept of IP. Suggested by lawyers no doubt.

To bring morality into the discussion is absurd. There is nothing immoral about taking some one's idea for your own.
Click to expand...

Let’s say you invest 13 million dollars researching and developing a product.

When your product hits the shelves, other people reverse engineer and copy your work and sell it as well. But they sell it cheaper because they did it have to spend 13 million dollars in development.

And you're completely ok with this?

Wouldn’t you think that innovation would cease? I mean...if you did all the work and spent all that money only to have it stolen? Why even innovate in the first place?
 
MolokaiRider said:
Let’s say you invest 13 million dollars researching and developing a product.

When your product hits the shelves, other people reverse engineer and copy your work and sell it as well. But they sell it cheaper because they did it have to spend 13 million dollars in development.

And you're completely ok with this?

Wouldn’t you think that innovation would cease? I mean...if you did all the work and spent all that money only to have it stolen? Why even innovate in the first place?
Click to expand...

That argument only holds water because when you made that investment you had the expectation the state would protect your IP. Without that you'd still need to innovate. And you could take the best ideas from your competitors as well.

You would have to keep improving your product or decreasing costs to maintain your edge. Good for the consumer

I don't think it would mean more great fictional authors.

But I do think it would mean better knives, cars, and tech. With many more small players getting in the game replacing the old.
 
BigWillie said:
That argument only holds water because when you made that investment you had the expectation the state would protect your IP. Without that you'd still need to innovate. And you could take the best ideas from your competitors as well.

You would have to keep improving your product or decreasing costs to maintain your edge. Good for the consumer

I don't think it would mean more great fictional authors.

But I do think it would mean better knives, cars, and tech. With many more small players getting in the game replacing the old.
Click to expand...

In my thought process, small businesses would be the first casualty. Having less overhead translates into less cash to continually revamp and refresh production. If they come up with something only to have it stolen before they can make a return...well...doors closed.

Only large corporations can afford this and therefore monopolize the market. This is turn would thin out diversity.

I’m only speculating though. I’m no business major. But I do own my own business if that counts for anything. Probably not. :)
 
We're NOT talking here about cures for cancer , revolutionary developments in electronics , or cold fusion ! :rolleyes:

Mostly fairly trivial variations in the style / shape of blades / handles .

Nothing costing multi millions or years of effort .

Legal protections already exist . Let the proper authorities deal with true violations . :cool::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Of course , the true revolutionary genius of the Cold Steel Tri-ad Lock is a glaring exception ! ;)
 
MolokaiRider said:
In my thought process, small businesses would be the first casualty. Having less overhead translates into less cash to continually revamp and refresh production. If they come up with something only to have it stolen before they can make a return...well...doors closed.

Only large corporations can afford this and therefore monopolize the market. This is turn would thin out diversity.

I’m only speculating though. I’m no business major. But I do own my own business if that counts for anything. Probably not. :)
Click to expand...

IMO it's about priorities

I prioritize the consumer/worker. But there is no lobbying group for that in the same way capital can lobby for IP law. Even our food regulation is laughable in this country.

If you view yourself as a business owner. As you probably do. Yes there is stability in IP and obvious benefits. I doubt our GDP would be as high without IP protections. But we woudln't be talking about buying Chinese knives or Japanese cars either.

edit - as to small or large players benefiting. In industries that weren't serving the consumer well small players would thrive. In contexts where the consumer is well served at low margins yea probably not good for small players.

But that's true in either system.
 
Last edited:
DocJD said:
We're NOT talking here about cures for cancer , revolutionary developments in electronics , or cold fusion ! :rolleyes:

Mostly fairly trivial variations in the style / shape of blades / handles .

Nothing costing multi millions or years of effort .

Legal protections already exist . Let the proper authorities deal with true violations . :cool::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Of course , the true revolutionary genius of the Cold Steel Tri-ad Lock is a glaring exception ! ;)
Click to expand...

Awww c’mon DocJD!

You know you’d be upset if someone copied the Tri-ad, renamed it, and claimed it as their own! Especially if the company called themselves “Colder Steel” and named the lock “Tri-adder’er” :):):)
 
MolokaiRider said:
Awww c’mon DocJD!

You know you’d be upset if someone copied the Tri-ad, renamed it, and claimed it as their own! Especially if the company called themselves “Colder Steel” and named the lock “Tri-adder’er” :):):)
Click to expand...

I'd buy that knife in a second. Especially if they printed the knife name in even more giant letters on a cartoon style, spring-out banner. BROKENER SKULLS!

703544-joker5.jpg
 
MolokaiRider said:
Awww c’mon DocJD!

You know you’d be upset if someone copied the Tri-ad, renamed it, and claimed it as their own! Especially if the company called themselves “Colder Steel” and named the lock “Tri-adder’er” :):):)
Click to expand...
Maybe before they adopted their new "MAP" price controls . Not so sure I'd care much now . Doesn't seem they care about MY costs , but only their profits and their dealers . So I guess they can look after protecting their own legal IP rights . Which they have never been shy of doing ! :rolleyes:
 
DocJD said:
Maybe before they adopted their new "MAP" price controls . Not so sure I'd care much now . Doesn't seem they care about MY costs , but only their profits and their dealers . So I guess they can look after protecting their own legal IP rights . Which they have never been shy of doing ! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I’m not that stoked about all the price hikes either. The cost of doing business in the States is ever rising. Regulations, rules, taxes, wages, materials, etc...

Probably even tougher to turn a profit when clones, counterfeiting, and theft is prevalent.

Definitely unfortunate for everyone.
 
BigWillie said:
IP protection is not some inherent human right

There is nothing immoral about ignoring claims of IP

Americans didn't care about IP law for much of our history. It's an indication capital has captured the state on this issue. Nothing more.

IP laws are not good for the consumer nor innovation. I have no reason to innovate when I have a monopoly provided to me by IP laws limiting my competition.

Authors have no inherent right to profit off their words if some one else can. If I had a printing press in 1600 I wasn't gonna send machiavelli's estate a cut of my earnings. That was always how things were done until we the western states INVENTED the concept of IP. Suggested by lawyers no doubt.

To bring morality into the discussion is absurd. There is nothing immoral about taking some one's idea for your own.
Click to expand...
Drivel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top