Spider hole trademarked?

corwise

corwise

Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
1,408
Random question. When the first Spidercos came out I heard from someone that they trademarked having a hole in the blade for one handed opening. Which is why everyone else put studs on their knives. I just bought a Benchmade mini-grip with a hole, so I was curious if whoever told me that the hole was trademarked was wrong, or if there was some strange legal-ese which allowed others to use them. Thanks.

Dave
 
This topic has been covered a hundred million times. Please do a little searching in the Spyderco forum or the Spyderco corporate site forum.
 
xdshooter said:
This topic has been covered a hundred million times.
Click to expand...

..which is a great reason to be rude......right shooter???


Hey Dave. I have heard that the spyderco hole is in fact trademarked. Apparently, and this is by memory, Benchmade has a deal with spyderco to use it on certain knives.

Take care!
Brett
 
Sorry if that sounded rude, but this topic has brought the talk of boycotts and the like to the forefront. Emotions on all sides run very high, and rehashing the legal stuff serves no purpose.
 
xdshooter said:
Sorry if that sounded rude, but this topic has brought the talk of boycotts and the like to the forefront. Emotions on all sides run very high, and rehashing the legal stuff serves no purpose.
Click to expand...

A bit of overreaction, especially since the two companies have an agreement.

He merely asked a question.

Brett
 
To clarify a bit, hopefully without fanning any flames: When Spyderco first started building knives, they applied for and were granted a patent for a depression in the blade which allowed purchase for the thumb to facilitate one hand opening. The particular application of the general patent that they settled on was a round hole, although they did use a trapezoidal depression on one model. While the patent was still in force, Spyderco applied to have one particular incarnation of the depression, namely the round hole, registered as a trademark of their company. That application was approved, and the round opening hole is in fact a registered trademark of Spyderco. The patent has run out, so anyone can use holes or depressions without infringing on a patent. They can use holes of shapes other than the round hole (or now the comet hole of the Byrd line which has also been registered as a trademark) freely.

This is where I stop to avoid fanning flames.
 
Mr. yablanowitz has explained the history here nicely.

This also explains a small change that took place at Benchmade. For many years, Benchmade offered the AFCK with a round hole. They did this under a patent license from Spyderco. When the patent expired and Spyderco converted it to a trademark, that cordial relationship had to end because you can't license a competitor to use your trademark; that would be pretty much contrary to the whole concept of trademark.
 
Well, we've now seen the Cliff's Notes version of this sordid tale and the theses on offer would be in the D+ range and in need of a rewrite.

However, so-called trademarks being invalid when covering functionality is one dead horse I am not beating again.;)

Let the myth making stand. I own both brands and they've never fought behind my back about their trade dressing.
 
My apologies for my failure to use the search function and bring up old wounds. It was a quick question with a crying baby in one arm, using search would have been difficult. :) Thanks for the quick answer, have a good week.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top