Sanrenmu 7010 vs CRKT Drifter

Status
Not open for further replies.
Armadew said:
What is your evidence?
Click to expand...
I will gladly share the video once I find it again on the Manix design being lifted from a custom maker. The ball bearing lock thing should be obvious. Using a ball instead of a rod is a legal technicality, and is an obvious lift of the Axis Lock which I'm sure you understand.
 
I don't agree about the access lock, but I'll await your evidence of the former.
 
JupiterPaladin said:
I will gladly share the video once I find it again on the Manix design being lifted from a custom maker. The ball bearing lock thing should be obvious. Using a ball instead of a rod is a legal technicality, and is an obvious lift of the Axis Lock which I'm sure you understand.
Click to expand...
It is different enough to get a different patent. Same with the Arc lock. Have you actually looked at these? Vastly different.
 
JupiterPaladin said:
I will gladly share the video once I find it again on the Manix design being lifted from a custom maker. The ball bearing lock thing should be obvious. Using a ball instead of a rod is a legal technicality, and is an obvious lift of the Axis Lock which I'm sure you understand.
Click to expand...
You left out the fact that it uses a different kind of spring entirely, which completely changes the way it has to be implemented in a knife. I can't believe anyone who had actually used both mechanisms could in any way think one was a copy of the other.
 
JupiterPaladin said:
I will gladly share the video once I find it again on the Manix design being lifted from a custom maker. The ball bearing lock thing should be obvious. Using a ball instead of a rod is a legal technicality, and is an obvious lift of the Axis Lock which I'm sure you understand.
Click to expand...

While they essentially perform the same function, the internals and parts to get it done are set up completely different.
https://www.spyderco.com/edge-u-cation/knife-anatomy/locking-mechanisms/
http://www.benchmade.com/benchmade-edge
Hard to call it an obvious rip off if both locks are patented.
 
The Ball Bearing lock is clearly of the direct lineage of Blackie Collin's bolt lock. The Axis lock is also part of this lineage but on a separate branch, as are the Hawk's DOG and HAWK locks. The bolt lock is in the public domain, which makes it fair use in it's original form and all these newer locks open to their own patent. To say that the ball bearing lock is based on the Axis lock is patently ridiculous if you know anything about the history of these various locks I've mentioned.

Seriously, educate yourselves.
 
Much like some of you don't agree on the locks, it's simple to me. One came first, the other made it work different to achieve the same basic goal. Yes technically and legally different, but to me, it still seems like a borrowed idea. Some of you are pretty invested in this stuff. It makes little difference to me since I see very few instances of companies in the clear. I don't care if they do it, I just see people who make excuses and defend certain companies but not others. And for the record I think Spyderco is on the top end in ethics despite my opinion of that lock. I have 2 on me today that I brought in for a coworker to fondle because I'm encouraging him to get one too.
 
Invented first:
Blackie Collin's Bolt Lock (public domain) = bullet-shaped bolt aligned longitudinally against the rear of the blade to prevent negative (closing) pressure by means of a spring pressing (against the bolt) longitudinally with the blade direction.

Developed later:
Benchmade's Axis Lock (patented) = bar aligned perpendicularly against the rear of the blade to prevent negative (closing) pressure by means of a spring pressing (against the bar) longitudinally with the blade direction.
Spyderco's Ball Bearing Lock (patented) = ball bearing resting against the rear of the blade to prevent negative (closing) pressure by means of a spring pressing (against the ball bearing) longitudinally with the blade direction.
G. & G. Hawk's DOG Lock (patented) = ramp aligned longitudinally against the rear of the blade to prevent negative (closing) pressure by means of a spring pressing (against the ramp) longitudinally with the blade direction.
 
Last edited:
JupiterPaladin said:
Much like some of you don't agree on the locks, it's simple to me. One came first, the other made it work different to achieve the same basic goal. Yes technically and legally different, but to me, it still seems like a borrowed idea. Some of you are pretty invested in this stuff. It makes little difference to me since I see very few instances of companies in the clear. I don't care if they do it, I just see people who make excuses and defend certain companies but not others. And for the record I think Spyderco is on the top end in ethics despite my opinion of that lock. I have 2 on me today that I brought in for a coworker to fondle because I'm encouraging him to get one too.
Click to expand...
The truth is not up for debate nor is it a matter of opinion. You made specific, spurious claims and have provided no evidence to support them whatsoever. This isn't, "Agree to disagree," you're simply wrong. Full stop.
 
Armadew said:
Exactly. There isn't any.
Click to expand...

But to understand your issue with Sanrenmu and IP, you are referring to them using the Access Lock without paying royalties to the patent owners?

I think I may have missed where you stated the IP they stole.
 
SpySmasher said:
The Ball Bearing lock is clearly of the direct lineage of Blackie Collin's bolt lock. The Axis lock is also part of this lineage but on a separate branch, as are the Hawk's DOG and HAWK locks. The bolt lock is in the public domain, which makes it fair use in it's original form and all these newer locks open to their own patent. To say that the ball bearing lock is based on the Axis lock is patently ridiculous if you know anything about the history of these various locks I've mentioned.

Seriously, educate yourselves.
Click to expand...
OK now this is a valuable piece of information I've never heard. All of the Axis Lock rhetoric in other threads never bothered to mention that. This considered I will alter my stance that it's not just the Bearing Lock but the Axis Lock as well are both just borrowed ideas implemented differently.
 
LastRodeo said:
But to understand your issue with Sanrenmu and IP, you are referring to them using the Access Lock without paying royalties to the patent owners?

I think I may have missed where you stated the IP they stole.
Click to expand...

I think we're talking past each other? I was referring to the claim that Spyderco stole the axis lock, which they didn't. Sanrenmu did.

Or am I misunderstanding you?
 
I misunderstood you, I thought you were referring to evidence related to Sanrenmu.

I don't think you specifically stated what IP Sanrenmu had stolen. Is it only that they failed to pay royalties for using the Axis Lock or is there other IP they have stolen?
 
Insipid Moniker said:
The truth is not up for debate nor is it a matter of opinion. You made specific, spurious claims and have provided no evidence to support them whatsoever. This isn't, "Agree to disagree," you're simply wrong. Full stop.
Click to expand...

No. My statement is this - They borrowed a function that was not original. Legally the altered implementation keeps them in the clear. That's it. The point was one of just about every company borrows things. If it's different enough for you that's fine. I was only trying to point out the glaring similarity. While altering the implementation does deserve some originality credit, it doesn't deserve the same amount as if the entire idea were original.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top