Sanrenmu 7010 vs CRKT Drifter

Status
Not open for further replies.
JupiterPaladin said:
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.
Click to expand...
You called it an obvious lift, admitted you didn't even know about the lock it does most resemble and revealed clear ignorance on the mechanisms in question.

Oh, you also claimed the design was stolen without a shred of evidence.
 
Ok, this is probably going to be long but try to stick with me.

I have an answer that works for me on the “hypothetical” question that’s been bandied about. I’d rather not use SanRenMu because, in my opinion, their theft extends only to their knives resembling existing knives. With the exception of a discontinued model that used a stolen Axis Lock, SRM’s sin lies in making knives that are clearly inspired by other knives. I consider this to be a gray area because the same charge could be made of anyone who makes knives.

Let’s go with the hypothetical assumption that Ganzo manufactures the Byrd line for Spyderco. I think we can all agree that Ganzo is the most rampant cloner of knife designs, stopping just short of outright counterfeiting.

I do buy and plan to continue to buy Spyderco knives.

I do not buy Ganzo knives and offer counsel against purchasing them whenever possible.

Why? I look upon it as weighing the relative merits of each company and their contribution to the industry and our shared hobby.

Spyderco and the Glesser family have brought innovation, continual quality improvement, value, service, support and accountability to the knife industry. Any hypothetical “sins” inherent in their business model, i.e.: using a cloner to manufacture knives in an arrangement that could be mutually beneficial, are simply outweighed by the massive amount of “good” they have brought to the industry.

Ganzo has done nothing for the industry other than offer copied designs at a price attractive enough to make them a viable choice for some folks. Their act of copying isn’t offset by ANYTHING. I’ve noticed that Ganzo appears to be pushing out some designs that appear to be original. If they keep that up AND discontinue the copying AND become a positive force in the industry (attend knife shows, offer support and service, etc.), SOMEDAY my stance on Ganzo knives may change.

It’s this kind of rational attitude that lets me accept the possible former ties between Reate and Adai or WE and Qtrmstr. I believe in giving everything a chance to redeem, whether a business or a person. Ganzo, and to a lesser extent SRM, have not shown any attempt to redeem but continue to leech off the industry.

I don't think you can adopt strict black and white attitude toward all knife manufacturers, but at the same time you have to make choices that are morally and fiscally beneficial to the industry IF you want that industry to stay strong and vibrant. In this area there truly is a carefully charted middle road.

As a sidenote, I believe it was Benchmade, not Spyderco, who had a relationship at some time with SRM. SRM was first to introduce the stolen Axis Lock on cheap knives and Benchmade has hinted that there was once a relationship that they now regret. Spyderco/SRM coop doesn’t mesh with the story of the development of 8Cr13MOV steel.
 
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...

They didn't "fail to pay royalties," they stole the design.

Do they need to steal more than one thing before they're bad?
 
JupiterPaladin said:
I think what LastRodeo is saying is that IF Sanrenmu made Byrd knives for Spyderco, then purchasing said Byrd knives supports Spyderco directly, but still supports Sanrenmu indirectly. In this scenario you know your purchase benefits a known IP thief. So is buying a Byrd in this scenario the same as buying a Sanrenmu directly? For the sake of argument, let's assume the alternate choice of buying the Sanrenmu is one of their own designs entirely.

While we're at the IP theft thing ad-nauseum, can we at least compile a list of companies that NEVER stole a design? I think that list will be mighty hard to justify because even my favorite, Spyderco, stole the design for the bearing lock and even the profile of the Manix was stolen... Sorry I meant "inspired by". Only saving grace there is that Eric Glesser's stole designs while Sal did not.
Click to expand...

I'm still curious about some proof that Eric glesser is a thief.
 
Who said I'm angry? I just find your wording bizarre. Like they just made a mistake. Oops! We forgot to pay royalties! No, they stole the design. No need to sugarcoat.
 
Armadew said:
They didn't "fail to pay royalties," they stole the design.

Do they need to steal more than one thing before they're bad?
Click to expand...
Yes. Much more than once........ as long as you are an american company doing the stealing.
 
C'mon PURPLE...at least YOU usually don't resort to that kind of lame response. I actually appreciate your perspective (even when we disagree).

That was just pot stirring.
 
trevitrace said:
I'm still curious about some proof that Eric glesser is a thief.
Click to expand...
My apologies. I will be a real man and admit my incorrect assertion. I found what I'm sure was a video that auto played while I was only partially paying attention. The dude said as I thought but failed to understand it was a Grimsmo Custom Manix that he was comparing to. I retract that portion of my previous statement. I appreciate HackenSlash and SpySmasher's thoughtful posts.
 
Armadew said:
Hypothetically... if Sanrenmu never stole any designs I wouldn't have a problem with them. But they did. So I do.
Click to expand...

You think they did, others would disagree. The mild similarities certainly wouldn't produce a good court case.

P1040905.jpg
 
Goosey said:
You think they did, others would disagree. The mild similarities certainly wouldn't produce a good court case.

P1040905.jpg
Click to expand...

Have you even read the thread? I don't even know how many times I've said the 710 isn't their only (or worse) offence. 4? 5?

With that, I'm done. It literally feels like I'm arguing with a kindergarten classroom.

Make-believe arguments. False comparisons. Accusations without evidence. Literally refusing to back up accusations. Personal attacks/insults. The boogeyman...

Astounding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mo2
What most people don't get is IP is a totally foreign concept to the Chinese.
Things do seem to be changing for the better with some manufacturers though.

The only thieves imo are those who willingly use another manufacturers branding and try to pass off their products as the real thing.

Nobody is buying a SRM and thinking they got a Sebenza.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
You called it an obvious lift, admitted you didn't even know about the lock it does most resemble and revealed clear ignorance on the mechanisms in question.

Oh, you also claimed the design was stolen without a shred of evidence.
Click to expand...

Just because I was unaware of the Blackie Collins design doesn't mean I'm ignorant to the 2 I was comparing. Axis Lock uses a bar and curved Omega springs, bearing lock uses a ball bearing and a straight coiled spring... So what? I'm saying that the end result is an ambidextrous protrusion used to lock and disengage a blade tang by pressing vertically. I see the obvious use of the same idea. Legally they are both fine, but it's not original. The new thing introduced is that both locks are just modified versions of somebody else's work. I also issued a retraction as I rediscovered the less than credible source of where I got the idea, in case you missed that.

We don't often discuss our personal lives here but I'm an Electronic Engineer. I've dealt with patent lawyers and have literally had a fortune ripped from me with those types of "technicalities" combined with legal team browbeating. I left General Electric a decade ago over one of these patents as it was one of my own division that stole it. So with experience in the system, when I see that technical detail stuff being used to justify theft of somebody else's work, I have no respect.
 
JupiterPaladin said:
Just because I was unaware of the Blackie Collins design doesn't mean I'm ignorant to the 2 I was comparing. Axis Lock uses a bar and curved Omega springs, bearing lock uses a ball bearing and a straight coiled spring... So what? I'm saying that the end result is an ambidextrous protrusion used to lock and disengage a blade tang by pressing vertically. I see the obvious use of the same idea. Legally they are both fine, but it's not original. The new thing introduced is that both locks are just modified versions of somebody else's work. I also issued a retraction as I rediscovered the less than credible source of where I got the idea, in case you missed that.

We don't often discuss our personal lives here but I'm an Electronic Engineer. I've dealt with patent lawyers and have literally had a fortune ripped from me with those types of "technicalities" combined with legal team browbeating. I left General Electric a decade ago over one of these patents as it was one of my own division that stole it. So with experience in the system, when I see that technical detail stuff being used to justify theft of somebody else's work, I have no respect.
Click to expand...
If I had lost that much money because I hadn't done all my legwork, I would probably make sure I was better acquainted with the legal details and technicalities, personally.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
If I had lost that much money because I hadn't done all my legwork, I would probably make sure I was better acquainted with the legal details and technicalities, personally.
Click to expand...

Nice. Point missed completely dude. There was no lack of legwork there, simply a matter of one firm convincing the court that this is different enough then coming back and covering alterations to the design after the fact, which were the original designs anyway. Funny thing is once you have a patent, they tend to side with you on that stuff even if you prove the originally filed patent was based on your work. Possession is 9/10ths of the law.
 
JupiterPaladin said:
Nice. Point missed completely dude. There was no lack of legwork there, simply a matter of one firm convincing the court that this is different enough then coming back and covering alterations to the design after the fact, which were the original designs anyway. Funny thing is once you have a patent, they tend to side with you on that stuff even if you prove the originally filed patent was based on your work. Possession is 9/10ths of the law.
Click to expand...
So you're deeply biased and railing against the system because of personal misfortune. This makes me less inclined to believe you when you still refuse to provide evidence to support your claims.
 
Personal experience gives my perspective. People say borrowing ideas for a knife is wrong. My situation is similar. Legal and moral are 2 different things. We don't have to agree. You don't have to believe me. I offered my thought on the lock similarities and my opinion is that they are derivative of somebody else's idea. That's known that they are based on the Collins design originally. I don't feel they deserve a pat on the back. It's cool if you do.
 
LastRodeo said:
The owner of the patent can license the use of the patent, typically royalties are paid for said use. Why are you so angry?
Click to expand...

And this is why no discussion on this can be had. Pot stirring "why you so mad" argument. Great.

Armadew said:
Who said I'm angry? I just find your wording bizarre. Like they just made a mistake. Oops! We forgot to pay royalties! No, they stole the design. No need to sugarcoat.
Click to expand...

Exactly. They had no intention of paying to use the axis lock. That is theft.

Armadew said:
With that, I'm done. It literally feels like I'm arguing with a kindergarten classroom.

Make-believe arguments. False comparisons. Accusations without evidence. Literally refusing to back up accusations. Personal attacks/insults. The boogeyman...

Astounding.
Click to expand...

Yup and yup.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top