Of Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks, and Intellectual Property

The "personal use" thoughts about patents and trademarks is a gray area. Unfortunately, as stated above, it's still infringement. Even if there are no monetary damages, there may be minimum statutory damages depending on which state you live in, and those are no fun.

Great thread!
 
I've tried to change it, honestly, as its a huge troll magnet. There is a reason I use the lower case l and I dont use it in business. I've had the screen name since 1996 everywhere before I went into business. Kind of got stuck with it.

I started a discussion that didnt have anything to do with me, I'm not suing anyone, or aggravated with anyone. This is a thread to deal with some issues that have come up in the past.

New members beware, any more pokes for the sake of poking, and you were warned, wont be met lightly. This is NOT Whine n Cheese. I've said it once, I wont say it again.

This is a great thread, and I wont let it get derailed by off commentary.
 
Dwayne- Don't worry- the copyright concept does not apply here. I think Joe R. is thinking about trademarks. Your screen name is not being used to sell goods and is just a forum nickname as far as I can tell.

These words are not interchangeable.

Trademarks protect consumers from confusion based upon a trade name or service.
Copyrights protect artists based upon their artist expressions. This right attaches automatically when the author renders an original work in an indelible medium.
Patents are an exciusive right granted to inventors that obtain a patent on a new, useful and nonobvious invention.
 
leatherman, it was just done in jest, that was what the wink was for.



Back on subject, let's say a knife designer patents a new look for a knife, and all due diligence is done and he/she is awarded a patent. Some time later a 16th century painting paint comes up with a knife of seemingly identical look. Will the patent hold? Could competitors petition to have the patent revoked? If the "good faith" of the designer could be established(i.e. designer could prove the he/she never saw the painting before) could that hold bearing on the outcome?
 
Dwayne, leatherman=leather man and sheathmaker=sheath maker, I don't think either one of us are in trouble..................or maybe we both are;)

Paul
 
sheathmaker said:
Dwayne, leatherman=leather man and sheathmaker=sheath maker, I don't think either one of us are in trouble..................or maybe we both are;)

Paul
Click to expand...

No doubt my friend, neither of us can stay out of trouble for long, if ever. :p I fear its in our nature.
 
It is a Sad day indeed when the law has to be used or the only option to force people to do what is right.
what happened to do what is right just because it is the right thing to do ?

"My word is my bond" what happened to that ?

Granted there are still guys out there that can do a deal on a handshake or by giving their word, but they are getting to be fewer and fewer.

Ask permission to make something for yourself, would be nice and the right thing to do, and I am sure most makers would say go for it.

But if you are in the business of selling things, be original and come up with your own style!!!!!!!

I have heard the argument "there is plenty of business for all of us" yes there is, heck make all the sheaths you want.
Plane old regular sheaths.

But copy someones style that is originated by them, marked by them and has become what they are known for just to take their unique share of the market is wrong and greedy.

As far as "the hole" it is a unique thing as well.

Do other knife makers need to copy it to survive, or make their knife work no, absolutely not.

But to gain another market share, make a little more money, thumb their nose at someone and be greedy...........well yes.

does the knife maker have to enforce the copy-write.......sadly yes.
does the knife maker get crap for it............again sadly yes.

If someone complains that they are being ripped off, they are looked at as a crybaby or asked "did you patent it?" or "do you have a copy-rite ?"

Again it is sad you have to legally force people to do what is right.

I have told my kids living to keep out of trouble is no way to live.

My 2 cents

Great topic, hope it is read by many.
 
Very well said Dave. :) I've always been of the opinion that those who copy a design(s) for profit as severely lacking in creativity. I'd say its ok to emulate at first while your learning, but do try to develop a style of your own.

oh! I discovered a package buried on my desk that I thought was out the door long ago! :o I'll be sending you a pm very soon, imadoofus.
 
Sam Maloof (though a woodworker, not a leatherworker)is an excellent example for this thread.

He developed a very distinctive style of furniture and admitted that he was initially angry that a lot of people copied his styling cues. But, he recognized that the copycats were what helped the increase the popularity of the style and help it spread much quicker and farther (from local to international).

Increase in popularity = increase in demand.

What really helped was that his work was published first. Because he was recognized as the originator, and could deliver a quality product, people with $$$$$$$$$ were lining up to buy his stuff.

By the time he died in his early 90's, I believe his rocking chairs were going for $40,000 to $50,000 and the waiting list was 6-7 years.

image004.jpg








But, on the other hand, he lived in a period before one could just send a picture to China and have thousands of units made for peanuts.
 
This is an excellent thread and one which I'm a bit surprised hasn't come up earlier. The knife industry seems to be so full of innovations which have "spread" from their originator, and it also has its fair share of what at the surface seem to be kinda strange trademarks. Something about trademarking an application of a round hole (which for milennia has been drilled into different objects) does not sit well with me, but at the same time I understand why it was necessary; it provides a stronger basis for pursuing someone involved in counterfeiting and can be a tool in maintaining a high standard in knives which could inadvertently be associated with one of the trademarking companies.

A counterfeiter might produce a knife with a well-recognised form and a logo resembling the original but in the form of an insect not an arachnid - what's the chance of noticing the two fewer microscopic etched legs on everyone's favourite auction site anyway?. The absence of a round hole though should set off alarm bells. From what I have seen - and it's limited to one example - the trademarking companies have also used their trademark as a way of controlling quality. A couple years ago I got chatting with a guy who makes folders and has obtained permission to use the round hole device. From what little I know of the situation the company was more concerned with the quality control of the knives in question and protecting their hard-won reputation than making any money out of a licensing deal.

The above example is one where the trademarking or patenting has been used for good. Unfortunately there are too many cases where it has been used for greed. Early attempts at patenting the human genome as a scientific discovery and [unnamed agricultural giant's] patenting genetically modified seeds - and then suing farmers for IP theft when their products were carried by birds into neighbouring farms - are examples of when it's gone wrong.

People work damn hard to take an idea, do the research, make the designs, implement, produce and build a business - too hard for some lazy and greedy bozo to steal it from them. Patents and trademarks are important and should be respected...but at times they can be a bit absurd.
 
Last edited:
The problem as I see it is the vague (at least they are vague to this non lawyer) terms

When a knife maker makes a post/allegation
"Look at this chump!! he copied my work!!"
I try and look at both pieces
Sometimes yeah
They are SIMILAR

Maybe I don't know enough about legal terms :(

I mean in terms of propriety technology and mechanics, function, etc
Like a locking mechanism on a knife
It seems pretty clear cut

But, when it's aesthetics
It seems really vague to me

So
To be honest
In my mind I say to myself
"Stop whining!! Let the lawyers figure it out!!!".....:)

Exhibit A
pacificall-blog.jpg


Exhibit B
998457_613867748658212_1253271532_n.jpg


Now
Some one tell me in proper legal terms
Is the Schrade an illegal "copy"?
 
Its not a counterfeit per say, but its one company using the rather obvious design features of another. Its not just simply similar, its them using the design of a very successful knife to sell their own product.

This is not the philosophy of the original Schrade, its the philosophy of an overseas parent company infamous for using the blood sweat and tears of another designer instead of creating their own designs.

Its blunt, but its the gist of a huge market from over seas and over here in the US in a lot of cases.
 
Long preparatory lead-in for a simple question. :D

With respect to patents,

Assume a feature on a product or line of products is patented by the original designer/maker/company.

XX years down the road, AFTER the original patent has expired, if someone wanted to use that feature in their work, would the 'new' maker/manufacturer need to get permission to use the feature from the original designer/maker/company or (or current holder of the name)?

The most obvious example of this situation of which I can think would be with the patent Western was granted in 1932ish for the double tang construction. The patent expired before Western sold out to Coleman who sold off the Western name to Camillus in 1984 who declared bankruptcy and sold off all assets in 2007.

If someone was to want to make double-tanged knives, would they need to legally or honorably have to get permission from someone?

I'm sure there are many other examples out there, some even dealing with sheaths. :D :D
 
leatherman said:
obvious design features of another. I
Click to expand...
That's what I'm saying
Vague terms

I guess my question is:
How would this be resolved in court?
A jury would decide or a judge
Based on terms like "what any reasonable prudent person would...."
"glowing similarities"
"blatant copy"
"obvious rip off"

Trent ain't no lawyer
Help me out...hehhehehe
I'm really curious
Is there a Patent Law For Dummies book?? :eek:
 
zzyzzogeton said:
Long preparatory lead-in for a simple question. :D

With respect to patents,

Assume a feature on a product or line of products is patented by the original designer/maker/company.

XX years down the road, AFTER the original patent has expired, if someone wanted to use that feature in their work, would the 'new' maker/manufacturer need to get permission to use the feature from the original designer/maker/company or (or current holder of the name)?

The most obvious example of this situation of which I can think would be with the patent Western was granted in 1932ish for the double tang construction. The patent expired before Western sold out to Coleman who sold off the Western name to Camillus in 1984 who declared bankruptcy and sold off all assets in 2007.

If someone was to want to make double-tanged knives, would they need to legally or honorably have to get permission from someone?

I'm sure there are many other examples out there, some even dealing with sheaths. :D :D
Click to expand...
Good points!!

The Buck 110 is what comes to mind for me.....
 
Not to be a jerk, patent blah blah, copy-rite yadda yadda lawers, can someone answer this ?

David Brown said:
It is a Sad day indeed when the law has to be used or the only option to force people to do what is right.
what happened to do what is right just because it is the right thing to do ?
Click to expand...
 
If Schrade was still a US company then yes, there would be lots of lawyering going on. But China does not respect US patents, trademarks, or copyrights. Now, with enough money someone could effectively keep a counterfeit from being imported, but that is not a counterfeit its simply a sad copy. There is a list somewhere of the countries that do not observe US patents or trademarks but I cannot find it.

Trent Rock said:
That's what I'm saying
Vague terms

I guess my question is:
How would this be resolved in court?
A jury would decide or a judge
Based on terms like "what any reasonable prudent person would...."
"glowing similarities"
"blatant copy"
"obvious rip off"

Trent ain't no lawyer
Help me out...hehhehehe
I'm really curious
Is there a Patent Law For Dummies book?? :eek:
Click to expand...
 
David Brown said:
Not to be a jerk, patent blah blah, copy-rite yadda yadda lawers, can someone answer this ?
Click to expand...

Agreed, honor and respect among makers is there among most, but, there are a few who simply want to make money and what better way than to let someone else do the sweating and R&D work. Its simple then to just make the product without all that hard stuff to do, the work has been done.
 
Dwayne,

It seems this discussion turned to China not respecting patents, someones word, honor and respect - none of which are matters of legality.

The reality is this - nearly every sheathmaker on this board and I know of cannot protect their patents in a court due to costs. Prior art, trademarks, and patents mean little when you need quite a bit of money to enforce it.

This was found to be true in the paintball industry. Two previous patent lawyers were part of the sport, and sued the hell out of people for things they didn't even own the patents to - or even were patented. They put a lot of smaller businesses out of business before themselves going under. They just had the time and expertise to do so.

The converse applies here. The little guy needs to be able to enforce any of his ideas - or they will be stolen by those who will simply wait for the cease and desist.

TF

TF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top