Spyderco Patent Hole ?

heatride

heatride

Joined
May 15, 2003
Messages
422
Ok I admit I am a idiot about a lot of thing's , but can someone explain to me how they managed to patent (Spyderco that is ) a hole? I can understand a patent for something like the axis lock but a hole ? Is it just me or doe's this seem rather strange. If they ever patent the pivot pin hole im in trouble , don't know why but I am curious about these things.
 
It's not a patent Glen, it's a trademark just like the CocaCola logo. That's why they can charge a fee for others to use it. As long as they pay their yearly maintenance fee the trademark is theirs to use and license as they wish.
 
Also you have to remember that when the opening hole first came out, it really was new and revolutionary.
 
Spyderco did have a patent on the "hole" as an opening device for folding knives. The patent has expired.

Spyderco also trademarked the "round hole". After the patent expired other knife companies started using different shaped holes as opening devices. The only round holes on folding knives come from Spyderco (and POS $1.99 knock-offs).

My partners and I are in the process of patenting Timascus. As part of the process we get to read lots of patents, some of which might be close to ours. You would be amazed that the pure BS that gets patented.

I think patenting the hole was a great idea. If gave Spyderco something unique to establish themselves. If you want to use a round hole to open your knife contact Spyderco. They used to have licensing program for custom knifemakers. If I remember correctly the license fees were given to Denver Children’s Hospital.
 
I forgot to add:

A pivot hole can not be patented because there is "prior art". This means other people have already used the pivot hole and marketed products with a pivot hole.

When Spyderco patented the hole as a blade opening device it was new, i.e. no one had done it before.
 
My Dad was a patent engineer, his job was to figure out how to do something and not copy another patent. He often said that all a patent was was a license for a law suet. Gib
 
The patent thing has been covered here before. A lot of knifemakers are afraid to cross the patent line even for one for themselves. While they should be concerned about litigation if they are selling their knives, personal use is another issue all together. Manufacture for personal use or say one for a gift is a gray area. What is not gray is the cost of litigation and recovery.

The patent holder can sue for damages and if the infringement is malicious, punitive damages.

Damages would be limited to the amount of money lost because of the infringement. No way will they recover attorneys fees unless the court awards the usual 30% of the damages. Let's say you copied a Spyderco that cost $30.00. Their award would be $30.00 plus a possible $10.00 for attorneys fees. The court may injoin you from further infringement.

Now the minimum cost to the company for this type of suit is in the neighborhood of $5,000.00. How much danger do you think you are in?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of running roughshod over the patent holders rights. I'm just saying that I want a hole in my knife just like Spyderco's, I'll put one there and not lose one minutes sleep!
 
Do they really donate the fees to the Children's hospital? That's cool! :cool: I love to hear things like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top