Paying Tribute, Flattery or “You Stole My Design”?

[haggismonger]

All due respect Mr. Montgomery, but as far as a new maker being 'ruined' by making a popular maker's design without permission, I would be hesitant to take that at face value without knowing all of the details. Something tells me there's more to the story, whether the budding maker tried to pass it off as either his own pattern, or spouted off arrogantly to the wrong collector/maker/enthusiast, but regardless, I would think that there would be a deeper ugly to the situation than simply copying a pattern.

I still feel the sting a bit from an incident that happened to me, I was working closely with another maker in his shop, since I had no workshop of my own at the time, and although I had been making knives for some eight or nine years previous to my first meeting this maker, I picked up a lot of tips and tricks from visiting with him, and he started telling all of his knifemaker contacts that he was the one that taught me to make knives.

I had made a few knives start to finish in his shop, working alongside him, and our styles and approaches were vastly different, and after he relocated out of state, I kept an eye on his work, and started to see a lot of the things I do with my knives showing up in his work. Should I be angry, some might say yes, but I don't really care, because no matter what they look like, or how they are marketed, or what price they are fetching, he makes HIS knives and I make MINE.

I'm not trying to split hairs, or make a mountain out of a molehill, quite the opposite, in fact- I think that this 'self-aggrandizing' line of thinking about design infringement takes all the fun and spirit out of making knives. Everyone is influenced by another's work, and all maker's like to hear about it.

I've only met one maker in all my life that wasn't welcoming and free with helpful information, and for the most part, never once did I ever see the slightest hint of stonewalling about design factor. If someone made a knife just like one of mine, looks like we have a common ground to start a conversation.

I made a 7" SOG RECON bowie just like Conrad Bakers design. I know it was just like it, because I asked him beforehand and he actually sent me a tracing of an original blank, as well as dimensions, materials, all that. I told him right off that I wasn't interested in mass producing it, I just liked it and wanted one for myself. He didn't hold back for an instant, no hesitation whatsoever. I want to model my response after his. I suppose he appreciated the hat-in-hand a little, but in the big picture, it may not have made a difference.

Frankly, if a customer comes to me asking for a model "X" knife that I offer, I'm not going to feel like I have to cover all my legal bases by trying to divine what influence people might think I 'stole' from and go around and get my permission slip signed off, because that's indicative of a nearly litigious arrogance that doesn't exist in the custom knife maker community.

 

[ddd]

Some of the more prominent custom knifemakers are very
particular about giving credit for similar designs or inspiring
designs as well as mentioning collaborators in a knife.

They even make it absolutely obvious by creating special etches
to do so, making a point of mentioning these facts on the blade
of their knives.

Among SR Johnson and Edmund Davidson's etches show below,
one can see quite a few examples of this...

On the other hand there are other makers who quite obviously
"copy" designs with no obvious credit and here and there even
design their logo etchings to look very similar to those of well
established world-class makers....
The latter always seemed to me a little ridiculous...

All the best,
David Darom (ddd)

 

[2knife]

........

 

[tvandeventer]

B.R. Hughes, accompanied by any number of highly regarded ABS Master Smiths, give a seminar on knife design (also known as, "How To Pass Your JS/MS Test"). These seminars are given at most ABS functions around the US and any aspiring bladesmith who does not attend them is doing himself a great disservice.

As John said, in these presentations B.R. mentions that few people have a "style" at this point in their career. He told us to go out and find a Master Smith whose work you admire the most - then copy it! I nearly fell out of my seat. From a scientist's point of view I saw this as simple plagiarism. But later as I contemplated his meaning, I realized that for centuries young artists have copies the great masters. Takes place in the halls of museums every day. By emulating the brush strokes and nuances of color and depth, the artist develops the skills and techniques needed to move into his own stylistic realm. Translate that into flow, balance, fit & finish.

On my Master Smith test, one of my five knives was labeled as, "Fisk-style Sendero Hunter." It wasn't a direct copy, but to this day, most of my hunter/utilities are obviously influenced by the Sendero.

More recently, my sheaths are heavilly reflecting Paul Long's work. As with my knives, I make efforts to change them enough that they are not exact copies. But I still refer to them as, "My own hand-sewn Paul Long-style sheaths."

Cheers,

Terry

Terry L. Vandeventer
ABS MS

 

[ddd]

B.R. Hughes, accompanied by any number of highly regarded ABS Master Smiths, give a seminar on knife design (also known as, "How To Pass Your JS/MS Test"). These seminars are given at most ABS functions around the US and any aspiring bladesmith who does not attend them is doing himself a great disservice.

As John said, in these presentations B.R. mentions that few people have a "style" at this point in their career. He told us to go out and find a Master Smith whose work you admire the most - then copy it! I nearly fell out of my seat. From a scientist's point of view I saw this as simple plagiarism. But later as I contemplated his meaning, I realized that for centuries young artists have copies the great masters. Takes place in the halls of museums every day. By emulating the brush strokes and nuances of color and depth, the artist develops the skills and techniques needed to move into his own stylistic realm. Translate that into flow, balance, fit & finish.

On my Master Smith test, one of my five knives was labeled as, "Fisk-style Sendero Hunter." It wasn't a direct copy, but to this day, most of my hunter/utilities are obviously influenced by the Sendero.

More recently, my sheaths are heavilly reflecting Paul Long's work. As with my knives, I make efforts to change them enough that they are not exact copies. But I still refer to them as, "My own hand-sewn Paul Long-style sheaths."

Cheers,

Terry

Terry L. Vandeventer
ABS MS

Hello Terry,
I like your your way of thinking (and acting accordingly)...

All the best,
David Darom (ddd)

 

[Kevin Jones]

B.R. Hughes, accompanied by any number of highly regarded ABS Master Smiths, give a seminar on knife design (also known as, "How To Pass Your JS/MS Test"). These seminars are given at most ABS functions around the US and any aspiring bladesmith who does not attend them is doing himself a great disservice.

As John said, in these presentations B.R. mentions that few people have a "style" at this point in their career. He told us to go out and find a Master Smith whose work you admire the most - then copy it! I nearly fell out of my seat. From a scientist's point of view I saw this as simple plagiarism. But later as I contemplated his meaning, I realized that for centuries young artists have copies the great masters. Takes place in the halls of museums every day. By emulating the brush strokes and nuances of color and depth, the artist develops the skills and techniques needed to move into his own stylistic realm. Translate that into flow, balance, fit & finish.

On my Master Smith test, one of my five knives was labeled as, "Fisk-style Sendero Hunter." It wasn't a direct copy, but to this day, most of my hunter/utilities are obviously influenced by the Sendero.

More recently, my sheaths are heavilly reflecting Paul Long's work. As with my knives, I make efforts to change them enough that they are not exact copies. But I still refer to them as, "My own hand-sewn Paul Long-style sheaths."

Cheers,

Terry

Terry L. Vandeventer
ABS MS

Jerry's Sendero Hunter design is one of the most "borrowed" designs of all knives, if not all then certainly forged knives.

Though usually given credit but sometimes not, Jerry seems to get a kick out of makers creating their rendition of it.
After all, though the design of the Sendero's handle, shape of the blade and features are all very deliberate in design there's only a single matched set of 10 which Jerry made for a client last year that are VERY close to the same. All others vary a bit in size, weight and embellishment.

When a maker creates an outstanding design why shouldn't other makers follow it? It's all apart of progressing the Art of Knifemaking.

 

[Kevin Jones]

Kevin,
Something about this one has a familiar tune about it, to me. Fisk-inspired?

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=659486
D.

I don't really see much of a Fisk influence here, but more of one from John White.

You do make a very good point, as newer makers do often look towards their mentors for influence in their designs. This is a great thing in my opinion as we ALL benefit from it as these newer maker's skills improve it can at times raise these designs to even higher levels.

For example, look how much custom knife designs have progressed over the last 20 years. Or even how much the typical ABS style Bowie design has progressed over just the last 10 years.

 

[ArtinNC]

Now you are just splitting hairs :jerkit: of course that is not what people are saying i think the general consensus is fairly clear. If you were inspired or copied asking and giving credit is the way to go.

I think you can take any knife and say any part of it looks like someones else's knife. On this forum someone posted a picture of a knife that he made and I had never heard of this maker. And I PM him with a picture of the same knife that I had made and I don't think he had ever seen my knife, and they looked like they were made off the same pattern.

So who should ask permission to make more of this style of knife? him or me?
I made it in 1990 and I don't know when he made his first one. I know he will say it's his design and I know that it's my design. So how do you handle this???

PS: I think this thread is splitting hairs, unless you are just talking about a direct copy of someones work.

 

[WalterDavis]

Since we're working with similar ideas, materials, and basic end results in mind, it's only natural that there is going to be a lot of similarities in designs. The basic human hand is somewhat limited in what it can hang on to, especially comfortably and/or for long periods of use, and the human arm can only hold up so much weight for so long. There will always be some overlap.

But I think as makers we owe it to ourselves and our community to be honest with where an idea came from. For example, I had a knife that I placed the pin holes too close to the edge of the handle and couldn't get wood or micarta scales on without them splitting. Here on BF I'd seen some of Rick Marchand's (Magnussen) knives with leather scales and really like the way they looked, so I asked if he minded if I used the idea on my knife. Even though my design wasn't anything like most of his work I'd seen, we share some of the same 'stomping ground' and out of simple respect I wasn't going use an idea I know I got from his work without his ok.

Having your work displayed in public (in books, on the net, or on the big screen) pretty much guarantees that someone, somewhere, is going to see it and want to emulate it. If you're like me, they'll probably do a better job with the copy than I did with the original I think it's only an issue when it's something fairly unique and the person copying it plans to make money off of it. I doubt anyone is going to get upset when a 19 year old comes up to them with their first knife done as a copy of that maker's work, and most would be flattered and offer tips to help improve the next one. But when it comes to someone you're actually competing with in the same marketplace for your next paychecks, I think extending that courtesy of recognition for design elements (or designs in whole) is a pretty smart idea all around. It makes you look knowledgeable enough to know where your inspiration is coming from, it makes the other maker look good, and it doesn't leave anyone with unanswered questions about the work at hand.

 

[Keith Montgomery]

All due respect Mr. Montgomery, but as far as a new maker being 'ruined' by making a popular maker's design without permission, I would be hesitant to take that at face value without knowing all of the details. Something tells me there's more to the story, whether the budding maker tried to pass it off as either his own pattern, or spouted off arrogantly to the wrong collector/maker/enthusiast, but regardless, I would think that there would be a deeper ugly to the situation than simply copying a pattern.

The new makers did not ask permission to make the design, nor did they give credit to the original maker. These were designs by what at the time were very hot makers that had a lot of fans. Those fans started attacking the new makers on many of the knife forums and eventually you just didn't see anything of those new makers any more. They may well still be making knives, but I haven't seen them anywhere since those episodes happened.

 

[papadops]

I think it depends on how varied the copy is. If it's basically a direct copy, then ask permission first. If it's an interpretation, or 'inpired by', then note it. If you are using a fairly 'proprietary' design element then definitely ask the originator. /QUOTE]


I agree somewhat with Walter's response. Yes, it depends on how varied the copy is. Many designs are taken from someone and tweaked and changed here and there and become somewhat different. And I don't mean just using different materials. I think this should be called "inspired" by ???
But a full on copy of a knife shape that some maker starts making a few of is thievery in my mind. I completely disagree that there is nothing new under the sun. As Kevin Jones puts it, some makers have a distinct design that can be instantly recognized. I therefore think it would have to be drastically changed to be able to call it your own.

 

[Keith Montgomery]

By the way, using certain elements of designs that other makers have done before you, to come up with your own personal style, is not the same as outright copying a design in its entirety. As has been mentioned, there is nothing new under the sun. All elements of a knife's look have been used in the past. It is how a maker uses that elements that will determine if the original makers were an inspiration or were plagiarized.

 

[Kohai999]

Apologies to those who think that there is nothing new under the sun.....you are mistaken. Our hobby is delineated by definitions and fine distinctions of appearance and function.

The front lock by the Alabama boys, including Harvey McBurnette, and side lock by W.D. Pease would illustrate my point, and how they subtly differ from back locks.

Just in the last decade or so, the Speed-safe was invented.....NOT an automatic knife by just about every definition, but sort of works like one. This is a design feature, but the knives made by Ken Onion including Dead Sexy, Boa, and Leek are unlike any folding knives made before them....and not just splitting hairs either.

Strider knives with the Titanium framelock on one side, and synthetic scale on the other are another example of a distinctive "look" that did not exist before.

The way that Loveless put design, execution, fit and finish together was simply non-existent until he showed up.

As I have written before, and stand by, at the very least, if a maker "appropriates" a distinct design element from another maker, it is simply courteous to inform the maker of this, and mention it when discussing the knife.

Those of you who truly believe that there is nothing new under the sun are doing the entire industry a disservice, though you may protest that is not the case.

Open your eyes.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

 

[Mike Carter Custom Knives]

Nearly every knife you see was inspired by someone's design. Knives have been around so long that it's pretty unlikely that you are going to come up with anything that hasn't been done. One of the old Sheffield companies once advertised that they had 10,000 patterns in their catalog.

I think there is a clear distinction between "inspired by" and a direct copy. There are a number of things that make a knife identifiable from other knives. It's pretty obvious when someone is making a copy and just trying to make a buck off of someone elses creativity and work. In the latter case, if they do not have presmission from the original designer, it is wrong. I don't care if it's one or a thousand copies, it's still wrong. The whole "tribute" thing is complete BS in my opinion and just a way to try to rationalize and justify cashing in on another's work.

This is a particular peeve of mine largely because my mentor and friend is Gil Hibben. Gil has had his work ripped off so may times it's ridiculous. Yes, a lot of Gil's knives were inspired by others and similaraties can be seen with the work of WW Cronk or Bill Scagel. In some cases Gil cleary states that a design was by Paul Ehlers but Gil made the knife. But Gil's work is clearly distinguishable as are the many direct knock-off copies.

I think a knife design should be copyrighted just like a photograph, painting, or original writing. Original artwork is automatically protected under copyright law the moment it is created. Why should an original knife design be any different? But knife designs are not directly covered under copyright law. One can get patents and design patents but it is a very difficult and expensive process that really doesn't offer any protection anyway.

General similaraties such as a blade shape is not the issue. But when you make a knife that is the same size and shape, with the same style handle and/or guard, or with the same combination of materials that gives the knife a particular identity, that is a problem.

I have no doubt that there have been cases where two people have come up with the same design and very similar knives without knowing that it had been done before. Again, I don't think that is the issue. In most cases where it is an issue, someone is making copies of a popular design.

I think there are some exceptions for historical knives that have been around long enough to be considered public domain. Especially in cases where the original design or designer is not clearly established. The Bowie knife and Nessmuk come to mind. The Nessmuk is popular and is based on a single drawing from one publication but it is not claimed to be made by or designed by the author and it is never creditied with where it came from. It may in fact never have even existed other than in that one sketch.

On the other hand, a Busse design, or a Spyderco, or a Rambo knife have a clear and well documented origin as well as an immediately recognizable look and identity. It is very obvious when someone is simply making and selling a copy just to cash in on something someone else made popular.

Edited to add: Selling is the other key factor here. Making a copy for yourself or maybe one as a gift is one thing. Making a copy, or copies, and offering them for sale to the public is clearly something else.

 

[B . Buxton]

Knife shapes and styles have been copied and recopied for thousands of years, I myself don't see anything wrong with another maker making a knife similar to anyone elses, its when it comes down to exact copies is where the line needs to be drawn, especially if that particular knife and materials are a good seller for the one that redeveloped its shape/style and materials. I have seen many makers come up with or rebirth a popular model and then seen other makers cabbage on it by making copies just to take sales away, bad business in my opinion.
Now when it comes to making new knives and borrowing ideas from different makers work to come up with your own style and designs I see nothing wrong with that, after all, there's only so many ways to make a good useable knife shape and I do believe they have all been covered at one time or another, so if we all had to come up with a new shape to be acceptable, I don't believe there would be many new makers.
You must also remember that just because 2 or more different makers make a knife very similar, that doesn't mean there all equal.

Just my opinion which usually doesn't mean squat in my house hold.

Bill

 

[ArtinNC]

Mike Carter,
(((I have no doubt that there have been cases where two people have come with the same design and very similar knives without knowing that it had been done before. Again, I don't think that is the issue.)))

This could become a big issue for some people. After reading this thread I PM the other maker of the knife that I was talking about that is like mine I didn't want him to think I was up set, and every thing is ok with us . And there is probley someone else that made that same pattern before me but I have never seen one.
Art

 

[Erik Fritz]

I think as a maker we are constantly evolveing in our techniques and designs based on what we learn as we go. i got to spend some time with Don Fogg a couple of weeks ago and he has completely changed my forgeing and finishing techniques. Now is this "copying" if i use these new techniques to do my style of knife? there is allot out there like STeven said that is new and inovative, but what about combineing techniques? IE Don Fogg's forgeing style and Tim Hancocks grinding techniques. i think by doing some of this is where new and distinct styles and designs come from. I gues what i am trying to say if i forge and finish a blade useing the techniques i learned from another maker is it going to look llike that makers knife or is it going to refine my own style?

 

[Keith Montgomery]

I certainly believe that as far as mechanical aspects of knife design there are new things coming along all the time. When it comes to the looks of a knife, I think that it's more in how a maker combines previously used design elements to come up with their own look. Sometimes the manufacturing process, and keeping it simple, will result in a new design feature, such as Strider's scale on the non-lock side of the handle and not on the lock side.

The idea that there is nothing new under the sun when it comes to designing the look of a knife is belied by the fact that many makers can come up with a look that is immediately recognizable as being theirs. Those knives are made up of elements that have been around for a long time, but they have been put together in a way that is different than what was done in the past, ending up with something totally new.

 

[J. Hoover]

Well this is how I feel on the subject, if an individual ever stamps my name on a blade he/she made then I'll be some upset. Until that time, which I hope never happens, people are free to make whatever they want. I know of some knife parts that have been patented, but off the top of my head I can't think of any knife shapes that have a patent in place. Everybody here knows that there is a standard most drop point fixed blades knives are made by. Now if I make a copy of a Loveless style drop point, call it that, and sell it for 200.00 thats great. It is also great that if a Loveless original in unused condition hits the market it will command much more to own.
If someone mentors, or teaches you a better way to do something and you start doing it that way your style has evolved to something slightly different and like anothers. People buy because they appreciate the makers work, and reputation.

 

[Kevin Jones]

Speaking of Tim Hancock and the refining of other's designs, makers have been building Dogbone Bowies for many years, however IMO Tim has refined the design to the point where the modern Dogbone Bowie has practically become his design. Or at least when many think of Dogbone Bowies Tim's examples come immediately to mind and makers use them as reference for making their Dogbone Bowies.