rant on plagerism

[Rick Marchand]

I'm fairly new to this forum so forgive my ignorance, but after reading everyone's comments, it would seem to me that it is ok to copy someone else's pattern/design simply because it would automatically be a copy itself (or some part of it) of some other blade that has been made in the last 3000 years. In other words, there is no pure "new" design out there, everything is an evolution of something else, yes or no?

That's pretty much it. You can patent design/brand features(see Busse Talon Holes), mechanisms or processes of innovation... but for the most part, blade profiles or patterns, unless otherwise trademarked, patented, registered, etc... are open game, legally. The question of ethics is something to consider, though. To me, honor, respect and fairness trumps the "legalities". You can be well within your legal rights and still be a douche, in my books.

 

[sykes3170]

Mr. Burke, Could we see a photo of the Damascus pattern you forged? I am just curious now that you commented on the problem. Is it possible that the other fellow happened on the pattern while forging away with no knowledge of your pattern? Certainly no one could approve of copying another's work without the mention that it was copied but maybe it was an innocent mistake. Thank you, Larry Lehman

This reflects my thoughts. If the pattern was copied knowingly it makes it an issue in my eyes. If not then?

 

[Greenberg Woods]

For me, I have always taken it as a time to prove that I am better than the fake. I work at a very high end carpentry shop where we make custom furniture, a table can easily run 4-5 grand, beds in the 8-9 range and so on. Lately some fakes have been popping up in our city, and while we are in litigation with those people, our business has not really dropped off. everyone who knows their stuff knows our work is the best, no question.

 

[jdm61]

That's pretty much it. You can patent design/brand features(see Busse Talon Holes), mechanisms or processes of innovation... but for the most part, blade profiles or patterns, unless otherwise trademarked, patented, registered, etc... are open game, legally. The question of ethics is something to consider, though. To me, honor, respect and fairness trumps the "legalities". You can be well within your legal rights and still be a douche, in my books.

In some cases, we are copying stuff from people who copied from someone else ad nauseum. If you look at the innocent looking Japanese gyuto, some may not realize that the blade shape was copied from the classic Sabatier type chefs knife and the only change was to remove the bothersome extended bolster and plug it into a tractional Japanese wa handle......sometimes. Other times, they just take the handle design too. On the other hand, if you exactly copy say one of the Cut Brooklyn modern designs, one of Bob Kramer's knives or Michael Raders funky multi piece wool handles, then it might be a bit different. Some makers like Bill Moran and a lot of the BAs guys would tell you to knock yourself out and go even farther by teaching large numbers of people how they do things. Others, perhaps not so much. I think that there is enough stuff out there where makers want you to be inspired by it that there is no need to step on anyone's toes.

 

[jdm61]

For me, I have always taken it as a time to prove that I am better than the fake. I work at a very high end carpentry shop where we make custom furniture, a table can easily run 4-5 grand, beds in the 8-9 range and so on. Lately some fakes have been popping up in our city, and while we are in litigation with those people, our business has not really dropped off. everyone who knows their stuff knows our work is the best, no question.

The old "confusion in the marketplace" claim can be complicated. There are some instances where it clearly is happening and if you guys are bothering to pony up the hard earned cash to litigate, I suspect that you have such a case because it is not an easy or cheap thing to do:thumbup:. Back in a previous life when I was a blood sucking lawyer, I had a client come in who had specifically designed a knife as a movie prop for a B-film and paid a well known knife maker who is currently deceased to build the piece. Unfortunately, the knife maker was apparently well known by some for things other than the quality of his blades, which were quite nice. A couple of months later, an issue of Blade or Knives Illustrated hits the stands and. lo and behold, here here is my clients knife being offered for sale using my clients name for the piece which also happened to be the name of the film AND the professional pictures that he had made including, IIRC, some of the promo stuff for the movie. Not cool. I sent the typical a-hole lawyer demand letter threatening to rain down death an destruction in him and his heirs and assigns for all time unless the guy did the immediate cease and desist thing and the guy flinched. But that cost my client a few hundred bucks that he should not have had to spend.

 

[A C Richards]

I have contacted at least one maker to ask if I could use a design feature they were using. I have also done some unique things that I had not seen done before. Within a few shows I saw it being done. Did I invent it or did they just happen onto the same idea? I recently made a Damascus pattern that may be similar to the one in question (Maybe Not). I have seen it done many times. I do not take credit for developing it just like I do not take credit for a standard feather pattern. So long as one is not trying to claim sole authorship or claiming to develop a new and unique pattern, I do not see much of an issue. As was stated most patterns have had some form of it done before. I hope if I ever do something that has caused an issue that I would be contacted and asked about it.

After reading the other post in custom & handmade Knives I could see there might be a problem. If the maker did not realize that the pattern was already done then that's one thing. If they do it knowingly and claim it to be their development then not cool.

 

[coldsteelburns]

It sounds as if THIS is where "he" got the idea for the pattern from, as far as I can see he gave credit to Bruce.. at least that's what I see as of "now," not sure about how it was worded originally, but all that matters is that he did end up giving credit where he felt was due.. right? I really can't see this individual having any intention of "stealing" or claiming to have been the first to make this pattern.. but aside from the topic at hand, that is a sweet WIP!! I'm glad that this thread reminded me of it!

~Paul

---

My YT Channel Lsubslimed

 

[Stacy E. Apelt - Bladesmith]

Many new ideas are used to make something the already exists different. Many ideas come nearly identically to more than one person.
In the above damascus example, a undulating pattern idea was applied to a feather pattern. Great idea, and hard to pull off....but the basic idea is old. I have seen falambarge blades with a "following" serpentine pattern. Viking swords were made with this pattern down the center. I made a dagger using this idea a good while back from a seven bar laminate ( with so-so results).

Point is, in this situation, all the parties involved are respected artisans. I don't think any one was ripping the other off or stealing an idea.


About fifteen years back, I had made a fancy MOP folder with ornate filework down the entirely damascus spine and blade. It was a southwest pattern with a thunderbird, arrows, sunburst, etc. I didn't think I had invented these patterns, but was proud of how I incorporated them in a rather fancy knife. I had it on my table at a NC show, and a "legendary" (in his own mind) person spent an hour looking at it and chatting about it. He took pictures of it, saying how much he liked the look. ( this chap is famous for only making one crappy kit knife, but co-authoring a book on knives). I sold the knife to a dealer I didn't know about an hour later. The next spring, I was at a VA show and the "legend" was walking around with an identical knife telling everyone he had made it himself ( a big lie) and that it was his original idea ( even a bigger lie). I guess he didn't recognize me when we met at the snack bar, because he showed it to me and proudly asked if I had ever seen anything like it before. I said, "Yes, it looks a lot like the one you looed at, and a dealer bought, last year in NC." He looked shocked, and said, "Oh, that is impossible, I made this years ago"..... you must have copied my idea....and quickly left the show. I never got to examine it closely, but it was either a copy ( made by someone for him) or the original.




Just as an aside, calling this plagiarism is somewhat inaccurate, but I understand the point being made.
Plagiarism is mainly applied to publishing and academia. The word actually means "kidnaping", and originally referred to "kidnaping" someone's poetry verses or words.
It might surprise people, but even though plagiarism is highly disrespected in the news, academic, and publishing industry, it isn't illegal at all. There is only a legal problem if it is a copyrighted document that was plagiarized.
The penalty for plagiarism is often far worse than a fine, though. Peers and the public loose all respect from people who were well respected up to discovery that they plagiarized something ( even unconsciously), and politicians/educators/scientists/writers/etc. regularly have lost their jobs and awards for even minor plagiarism.

To see how far this goes sometimes, just look at the Smith/Petty situation in the Grammys about the similarity of a set of chords and the key to a song from 25 years back. Because the song is copyrighted, the case went to court, and the Petty won the right to claim he was co-author ( and royalties) of a song he had nothing to do with. This is similar to his suit with the Red Hot Chili Peppers over one lyric.......pretty petty, IMHO.

 

[snippy]

Many new ideas are used to make something the already exists different. Many ideas come nearly identically to more than one person.
In the above damascus example, a undulating pattern idea was applied to a feather pattern. Great idea, and hard to pull off....but the basic idea is old. I have seen falambarge blades with a "following" serpentine pattern. Viking swords were made with this pattern down the center. I made a dagger using this idea a good while back from a seven bar laminate ( with so-so results).

Point is, in this situation, all the parties involved are respected artisans. I don't think any one was ripping the other off or stealing an idea.


About fifteen years back, I had made a fancy MOP folder with ornate filework down the entirely damascus spine and blade. It was a southwest pattern with a thunderbird, arrows, sunburst, etc. I didn't think I had invented these patterns, but was proud of how I incorporated them in a rather fancy knife. I had it on my table at a NC show, and a "legendary" (in his own mind) person spent an hour looking at it and chatting about it. He took pictures of it, saying how much he liked the look. ( this chap is famous for only making one crappy kit knife, but co-authoring a book on knives). I sold the knife to a dealer I didn't know about an hour later. The next spring, I was at a VA show and the "legend" was walking around with an identical knife telling everyone he had made it himself ( a big lie) and that it was his original idea ( even a bigger lie). I guess he didn't recognize me when we met at the snack bar, because he showed it to me and proudly asked if I had ever seen anything like it before. I said, "Yes, it looks a lot like the one you looed at, and a dealer bought, last year in NC." He looked shocked, and said, "Oh, that is impossible, I made this years ago"..... you must have copied my idea....and quickly left the show. I never got to examine it closely, but it was either a copy ( made by someone for him) or the original.




Just as an aside, calling this plagiarism is somewhat inaccurate, but I understand the point being made.
Plagiarism is mainly applied to publishing and academia. The word actually means "kidnaping", and originally referred to "kidnaping" someone's poetry verses or words.
It might surprise people, but even though plagiarism is highly disrespected in the news, academic, and publishing industry, it isn't illegal at all. There is only a legal problem if it is a copyrighted document that was plagiarized.
The penalty for plagiarism is often far worse than a fine, though. Peers and the public loose all respect from people who were well respected up to discovery that they plagiarized something ( even unconsciously), and politicians/educators/scientists/writers/etc. regularly have lost their jobs and awards for even minor plagiarism.

To see how far this goes sometimes, just look at the Smith/Petty situation in the Grammys about the similarity of a set of chords and the key to a song from 25 years back. Because the song is copyrighted, the case went to court, and the Petty won the right to claim he was co-author ( and royalties) of a song he had nothing to do with. This is similar to his suit with the Red Hot Chili Peppers over one lyric.......pretty petty, IMHO.

You, Sir, are an amazing scholar. Well said.

Eric

 

[AVigil]

This thread is like trying to decipher a secret code

 

[elementfe]

Then there's the time those two fellas discovered calculus concurrently.
They were both men of rare insight, and were both simply building on what had been done before, and took the same next step, and fought over it the rest of their lives.
Everyone is watching the leaders, and though there is such a thing as copying it and calling it your own invention, it's usually all about the way things develop.
Again, since we don't know what the pattern is, there's no way I can even have an opinion...

 

[jdm61]

The impression that I git from the other thread over in the custom subform is that Mr Burke came up with this pattern in question like 11 or 12 years ago and at least one other top smith made it, as he said, by accident, but gives Bill full credit for coming up with it first. The implication was that the recent person did not do so initially. If it is the "serpentine feather" pattern that we are talking about, then I recall seeing the first time on a Bruce Bump piece, who is the aforementioned apologetic accidental maker. That was a number of years after Bill came up with it as I was not on the forums until a couple of years after that.

 

[Bill Burke]

The impression that I git from the other thread over in the custom subform is that Mr Burke came up with this pattern in question like 11 or 12 years ago and at least one other top smith made it, as he said, by accident, but gives Bill full credit for coming up with it first. The implication was that the recent person did not do so initially. If it is the "serpentine feather" pattern that we are talking about, then I recall seeing the first time on a Bruce Bump piece, who is the aforementioned apologetic accidental maker. That was a number of years after Bill came up with it as I was not on the forums until a couple of years after that.

correct JD. river of fire, aka serpentine feather.

first bar

first use on a knife

first blades.

 

[jdm61]

correct JD. river of fire, aka serpentine feather.

first bar

first use on a knife

first blades.

Your pattern is more dramatic. As best as I can tell, you are looking more for clear attribution and perhaps people going to the minimal effort of asking permission as opposed to monetary compensation or not using the pattern at all, correct?

 

[AVigil]

Wow...very impressive..

Kinda reminds me of a Quetzal birds tail

correct JD. river of fire, aka serpentine feather.

first bar

first use on a knife

first blades.

 

[Bill Burke]

Your pattern is more dramatic. As best as I can tell, you are looking more for clear attribution and perhaps people going to the minimal effort of asking permission as opposed to monetary compensation or not using the pattern at all, correct?

yes and no. I acknowledge that anyone and everyone is free to duplicate this pattern if they are capable of doing so no need to even call and ask but that would be nice. if anybody wants to know how to make this I will tell or show them both ways that I use to make it. all I ask is that at best they acknowledge that their pattern is based or inspired by what I have done and use the name that I use, River of fire. And at worst not say that it is a new patter they have made! the word "new" gives the impression that it is something the maker developed.

 

[Stacy E. Apelt - Bladesmith]

Fair enough request.

Have you talked with the two of them and asked if your or Bruce's damascus inspired their billet, or if it is an (un)happy coincidence.

I don't think it is practical to require they call it what you did, though. I do think they should credit your "River of Fire" billets as their inspiration, if they had seen it in the past.

 

[javand]

Here's my take Bill, as someone who's main joy resides in coming up with new damascus patterns:

I don't tell most people how I make the patterns I really like, just my close friends. I tell them, if it's something I'm trying to hold on-to for myself, not to tell anybody, but I expect them to give credit if they use them. They always have. I encourage others to try and figure out how I made them, and I've only got a couple that I think are unique enough in pattern development that I won't just tell you how I made it.


*However* if someone else figures it out, well, good for them. Hopefully they'll give credit if they saw my pattern and tried to duplicate it.


I myself see other's patterns, and try to figure out how they did it, I'll give credit also, but realistically, if you didn't tell them, and they had to discover it on their own, I'm not sure how much credit is owed, since they had to figure it out the way you did. Some patterns are clever plays on old techniques and can be easy to figure out. Some can be insanely difficult if you're not even sure what pattern development process they're using to start with.


Although I 100% agree that if they've ever seen your pattern, before they duplicated it, they should use the name you came up with. That's the prize you get for being first.


I guess for me it comes down to whether or not they're intentionally duplicating your pattern, or they stumbled across the same pattern.. I'd say that's the only distinction. If they know you did it first, they probably deserve to give you some credit but at some point if a pattern becomes prevalent enough people forget where it came from. Especially when they're variations of a pattern.


Zoe Crist showed me how to make feathers, he told me his feather was shown to/inspired by Kevin Casey. That's as far back as I can give credit, when I do them, but of course, by using the same name, I'm paying homage.


Here's one I came up with last year, I think I may have showed you at Blade:

 

[jdm61]

Here's my take Bill, as someone who's main joy resides in coming up with new damascus patterns:

I don't tell most people how I make the patterns I really like, just my close friends. I tell them, if it's something I'm trying to hold on-to for myself, not to tell anybody, but I expect them to give credit if they use them. They always have. I encourage others to try and figure out how I made them, and I've only got a couple that I think are unique enough in pattern development that I won't just tell you how I made it.


*However* if someone else figures it out, well, good for them. Hopefully they'll give credit if they saw my pattern and tried to duplicate it.


I myself see other's patterns, and try to figure out how they did it, I'll give credit also, but realistically, if you didn't tell them, and they had to discover it on their own, I'm not sure how much credit is owed, since they had to figure it out the way you did. Some patterns are clever plays on old techniques and can be easy to figure out. Some can be insanely difficult if you're not even sure what pattern development process they're using to start with.


Although I 100% agree that if they've ever seen your pattern, before they duplicated it, they should use the name you came up with. That's the prize you get for being first.


I guess for me it comes down to whether or not they're intentionally duplicating your pattern, or they stumbled across the same pattern.. I'd say that's the only distinction. If they know you did it first, they probably deserve to give you some credit but at some point if a pattern becomes prevalent enough people forget where it came from. Especially when they're variations of a pattern.


Zoe Crist showed me how to make feathers, he told me his feather was shown to/inspired by Kevin Casey. That's as far back as I can give credit, when I do them, but of course, by using the same name, I'm paying homage.


Here's one I came up with last year, I think I may have showed you at Blade:

Very nice. My uneducated guess would be multiple pieces of firestorm split lengthwise and opened up or possible the same bar twisted in opposite directions welded to pieces of monosteel in perhaps 5 alternating layers

 

[Bill Burke]

Here's my take Bill, as someone who's main joy resides in coming up with new damascus patterns:

I don't tell most people how I make the patterns I really like, just my close friends. I tell them, if it's something I'm trying to hold on-to for myself, not to tell anybody, but I expect them to give credit if they use them. They always have. I encourage others to try and figure out how I made them, and I've only got a couple that I think are unique enough in pattern development that I won't just tell you how I made it.


*However* if someone else figures it out, well, good for them. Hopefully they'll give credit if they saw my pattern and tried to duplicate it.


I myself see other's patterns, and try to figure out how they did it, I'll give credit also, but realistically, if you didn't tell them, and they had to discover it on their own, I'm not sure how much credit is owed, since they had to figure it out the way you did. Some patterns are clever plays on old techniques and can be easy to figure out. Some can be insanely difficult if you're not even sure what pattern development process they're using to start with.


Although I 100% agree that if they've ever seen your pattern, before they duplicated it, they should use the name you came up with. That's the prize you get for being first.


I guess for me it comes down to whether or not they're intentionally duplicating your pattern, or they stumbled across the same pattern.. I'd say that's the only distinction. If they know you did it first, they probably deserve to give you some credit but at some point if a pattern becomes prevalent enough people forget where it came from. Especially when they're variations of a pattern.


Zoe Crist showed me how to make feathers, he told me his feather was shown to/inspired by Kevin Casey. That's as far back as I can give credit, when I do them, but of course, by using the same name, I'm paying homage.


Here's one I came up with last year, I think I may have showed you at Blade:

That is a beautiful pattern. I don't recall seeing it at blade I wish that I would have.