removed from NEW CRK Impofu

u812

u812

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
13,438
I am wondering a bit about the hole. You would think that CRK would know it is a trade mark.
 
For anyone confused about what people are discussing with the "Talon Hole", the issue is that this hole in the finger guard has been a distinguishing feature of Busse knives for quite some time. Busse actually claims it as a trademark on their website. Not sure that I care, and not sure that I agree you can trademark a hole, but nonetheless that's what the controversy is. Sometimes I think manufacturers do these things just to get people talking. :D Certainly there are plenty of CRK features that are now commonplace on other makers knives.

Does the hole serve a purpose?

http://www.bussecombat.com/anatomy-of-a-busse/
 
Last edited:
kidcongo said:
For anyone confused about what people are discussing with the "Talon Hole", the issue is that this hole in the finger guard has been a distinguishing feature of Busse knives for quite some time. Busse actually claims it as a trademark on their website. Not sure that I care, and not sure that I agree you can trademark a hole, but nonetheless that's what the controversy is. Sometimes I think manufacturers do these things just to get people talking. :D Certainly there are plenty of CRK features that are now commonplace on other makers knives.

Does the hole serve a purpose?

http://www.bussecombat.com/anatomy-of-a-busse/
Click to expand...

You can trademark a talon hole, and Busse did in fact do that. Didn't just "claim" to.
Busse didn't do it just to get people talking. It has uses, but the main reason they did it was to make their knives distinguishable from all others.
Sure, there are CRK features on other knives, and mostly the RIL, but I don't think any of them were trademarked.
It was very good of Chris to let others use his RIL :thumbup: I think he knew none could do it as well as he:p

I'm not taking sides, and a hole does seem pretty minor, but it is what it is.
I'm pretty sure it will have to be changed before final production. Then again, they may have worked a deal out, but I kind of doubt it.
 
Ken44 said:
You can trademark a talon hole, and Busse did in fact do that. Didn't just "claim" to.
Busse didn't do it just to get people talking. It has uses, but the main reason they did it was to make their knives distinguishable from all others.
Sure, there are CRK features on other knives, and mostly the RIL, but I don't think any of them were trademarked.
It was very good of Chris to let others use his RIL :thumbup: I think he knew none could do it as well as he:p

I'm not taking sides, and a hole does seem pretty minor, but it is what it is.
I'm pretty sure it will have to be changed before final production. Then again, they may have worked a deal out, but I kind of doubt it.
Click to expand...

Sorry Ken,

What I meant was CRK put the hole in there knowing full well it was a Busse feature. So you interpreted my statement backwards, but that's all cool. It is very weird to me, because I like Busse knives, and I can always spot one by the hole in the finger guard, so it was an effective way of identifying their knives. Certainly this new CRK has a lot in common with the very famous Busse Battle Mistress, so when I first saw it my reaction was that it must be a Reeve/Busse collaboration like the Reeve/Harsey fixed blades. My guess is that it is a collaboration, or why they heck else would you put that hole there, unless you just wanted to annoy Busse fans. It serves no practical purpose that I am aware of, but maybe I just don't know what it is for.
 
I just find it very strange that with as hard as the real industry innovators work for their designs,patents and trademarks that one would rip off another. That to me is for the bottom feeding knock off companies. Because of how much both companies get their stuff ripped off I am thinking this hole must have been cleared by Busse Combat. Really hoping it was. Really hoping it might be the behind closed doors start of a colab folder between the two.
 
I wonder if it is a manufacturing indexing hole, along with the lanyard hole, for machining operations.

Like the hole on the scales of a Sebenza 21 that are used to hold the scale in place during production.

Yes, it is absent on the 25, but this new knife is pretty large.

Something tells me Chris Reeve does not feel the need to copy anyone else. He's been doing his own thing for quite some time now and is very successful at it. I don't feel (my opinion, might be wrong of course) he'd feel the need to copy Busse or anybody else for that matter.

Collaborate, yes. Copy, well... The man seems content forging his own path as he sees fit.
 
kidcongo said:
Sorry Ken,

What I meant was CRK put the hole in there knowing full well it was a Busse feature. So you interpreted my statement backwards, but that's all cool. It is very weird to me, because I like Busse knives, and I can always spot one by the hole in the finger guard, so it was an effective way of identifying their knives. Certainly this new CRK has a lot in common with the very famous Busse Battle Mistress, so when I first saw it my reaction was that it must be a Reeve/Busse collaboration like the Reeve/Harsey fixed blades. My guess is that it is a collaboration, or why they heck else would you put that hole there, unless you just wanted to annoy Busse fans. It serves no practical purpose that I am aware of, but maybe I just don't know what it is for.
Click to expand...


OK, know I understand where you were coming from. Sorry about that.
I hope it is a collaboration, but it would surprise me if either would do that. And you're right, if its not a collaboration it will annoy some Busse fans, many of whom own CRK folders.
I'm thinking this will get settled out at Blade this weekend.
 
u812 said:
I just find it very strange that with as hard as the real industry innovators work for their designs,patents and trademarks that one would rip off another. That to me is for the bottom feeding knock off companies. Because of how much both companies get their stuff ripped off I am thinking this hole must have been cleared by Busse Combat. Really hoping it was. Really hoping it might be the behind closed doors start of a colab folder between the two.
Click to expand...

Someone should ask in person at Blade? I'd be surprised if CRK used a trademark without prior sign-off.
 
JNewell said:
Someone should ask in person at Blade? I'd be surprised if CRK used a trademark without prior sign-off.
Click to expand...

I guess it comes down to whether the hole has a practical purpose, or if it's just a aesthetic design feature. If it was a locating hole for machining, it could have been left under the slabs. I do think Busse would have a hard time arguing that they can trademark a hole, though they may have it registered. If challenged, it would likely fail in court as I doubt drilling a hole anywhere in the blade could be considered intellectual property or something that could be patented if it was not a functional improvement on how the knife works. Certainly there are enough Spyderholes of various shapes and sizes in other folders that are not licensed by Spyderco. I think Benchmade even goes so far as to just make their holes round (which is arguably the best shape for the hole-type openers).

Public perception will be the biggest factor. People are sensitive about things like this in the blade community, and if enough people care, or think it's a bigger issue that it is, that will be the deciding factor I would say, unless of course it does represent some collaboration with Busse.

I am just curious as to what the purpose of the hole is in the minds of the CRK folk?
 
I do believe that both companies have argued the trademark and have won. Benchmade and Spyderco had it out about the hole and Spyderco lost. Not sure but I think that was because Benchmade had made knives for Spyderco with the hole in the blade at one time.
 
kidcongo said:
I do think Busse would have a hard time arguing that they can trademark a hole, though they may have it registered.
If challenged, it would likely fail in court as I doubt drilling a hole anywhere in the blade could be considered intellectual property or something that could be patented if it was not a functional improvement on how the knife works.
Click to expand...

As I said above, the talon hole is a registered Busse trademark.
Not a hard time arguing that at all. Many companies have TRIED to use the talon hole, though none kept doing it.
They're mostly used for D-guards. Though most don't use the hole for anything, many do.
I feel the main reason Jerry works to keep it off of other knives is to keep his knives distinguishable from all others, and I can understand why he would want to do that.
I won't quote a post Jerry has made about the Talon hole trademark(not really the room to get into it further), but you can search BF or Google and find some.



Getting back on topic...
10" of .270 thick 3V is going to make for one bad azz chopper/large bush knife :thumbup:
 
Just picked up one of the first 14@ Blade and a CRK employee told me that the hole has not been discussed between CRK and Busse.
 
lemmuhj said:
Just picked up one of the first 14@ Blade and a CRK employee told me that the hole has not been discussed between CRK and Busse.
Click to expand...

Wow. Not good at all.
You better hang on the that one, as I have a feeling those may be the only ones sold with the trademarked Busse talon hole.
Or at least I hope so !
 
Guys, it's a "Hole" in the guard......!!! Does this mean everyone that makes a FRAMELOCK rips off Chris Reeve....??? If that's the case I am calling out Hinderer, Strider, Spyderco........Its a Knife, it has an edge, a handles, and ummm yes, holes.
There are makers out there blatantly ripping off CRK everyday by putting the CRK name and Logo on their knives, yet because they make them in another country, copyright laws do not hold much weight....!!!

I love both companies and will continue to buy from Busse & CRK Always....!!!
 
I agree on both sides of the "hole issue" like Ken and Nyemaker have pointed out. On one hand, it seems that It would only be right of CRK to "ask permission" from Busse, but then again, "it's only a hole", like nyfemaker said.

I have no idea how these mimicking issues are supposed to work out between companies. Maybe CRK and Busse could care less, and we are the ones making the big deal out of it??!

Anyway, I'll try to snap some photos of the new knife so everyone can see it in hand/next to a Pacific or something.
 
nyefmaker said:
Guys, it's a "Hole" in the guard......!!! Does this mean everyone that makes a FRAMELOCK rips off Chris Reeve....??? If that's the case I am calling out Hinderer, Strider, Spyderco........Its a Knife, it has an edge, a handles, and ummm yes, holes.
There are makers out there blatantly ripping off CRK everyday by putting the CRK name and Logo on their knives, yet because they make them in another country, copyright laws do not hold much weight....!!!

I love both companies and will continue to buy from Busse & CRK Always....!!!
Click to expand...

It's a trademark. Mr. Reeve had the option of legally protecting the RIL and chose not to do so. That hardly makes other things fair game.
 
al g blenny said:
Those of you saying this kills their desire for a Busse.....more for me!:p. but seriously Busse isn't just about big blades and styling. It's all about the INFI!!!! CRK makes some awesome folders though. LOVE my Star Tac Umnum.
Click to expand...

In the absence of any explanation of the talon hole, this knife does much more to kill my desire for a CRK than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top