When is everyone okay with copying designs?

[yexactly]

A two-and-one-half year study by Renee Gosline of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology looked at people who purchase counterfeit luxury items, like handbags and sunglasses, and found that counterfeits do not hurt the sales of luxury brands so long as consumers can distinguish between them. Indeed, Gosline found that counterfeits are often used as “trial versions” of the high-end genuine branded item, with over 40% of counterfeit handbag consumers ultimately purchasing the real brand.

http://freakonomics.com/2012/09/05/why-knockoffs-can-help-a-strong-brand/

Notice the bold: SO LONG AS CONSUMERS CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THEM

This is the problem for the knife industry.. It is very difficult for consumers to distinguish between the real thing and the fake.. and this won't change so long as Makers do not implement a serial# system and ownership registry.. or some kind of system which helps consumers distinguish.

 

[bld522]

A two-and-one-half year study by Renee Gosline of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology looked at people who purchase counterfeit luxury items, like handbags and sunglasses, and found that counterfeits do not hurt the sales of luxury brands so long as consumers can distinguish between them. Indeed, Gosline found that counterfeits are often used as “trial versions” of the high-end genuine branded item, with over 40% of counterfeit handbag consumers ultimately purchasing the real brand.

http://freakonomics.com/2012/09/05/why-knockoffs-can-help-a-strong-brand/

Notice the bold: SO LONG AS CONSUMERS CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THEM

This is the problem for the knife industry.. It is very difficult for consumers to distinguish between the real thing and the fake.. and this won't change so long as Makers do not implement a serial# system and ownership registry.. or some kind of system which helps consumers distinguish.

Honestly, this study doesn't surprise me at all. Makes me wonder which would be more expensive . . . instituting a serial number system/owner registry or paying someone to track down and sue the bad guys . . . assuming you could find them and sue them successfully, that is. And there is one other thorny question. How difficult would it be for counterfeiters to serialize their counterfeits with numbers that fall within the legitimate range?

As I alluded to earlier, counterfeiting is a problem that has no solution. Continuing to rail against it, while entertaining to watch, is tantamount to tilting at windmills.

Life is a game . . .

 

[AreBeeBee]

...This is the problem for the knife industry.. It is very difficult for consumers to distinguish between the real thing and the fake.. and this won't change so long as Makers do not implement a serial# system and ownership registry.. or some kind of system which helps consumers distinguish.

If you can fake a knife, you can fake a serial number, so that's no protection. Everything depends entirely on the model and how close the resemblance is. I have no trouble telling an SRM 710 from a Sebenza, and anyone who can't tell the difference — well, as the saying goes, a fool and his money are soon separated.

What edges over into fraud is when you make a nearly perfect copy of a Hermes bag, complete with correct logos but out of inferior materials, and then sell it on the street as the real thing.

The point of that article, and my point as well, is that when the differences are as obvious as the SRM 710 compared to a Sebenza, then there's no harm, no foul.

 

[KenHash]

"There's nothing we can do about xxxxxx" is the worst position to take about anything. Take your pick; DUI, terrorism, child molesters, counterfeit products. The moment you decide it's not worth expressing an objection, from a legal standpoint you have accepted it. The more people who "accept" it, the more the practice flourishes and grows.

 

[bld522]

"There's nothing we can do about xxxxxx" is the worst position to take about anything. Take your pick; DUI, terrorism, child molesters, counterfeit products. The moment you decide it's not worth expressing an objection, from a legal standpoint you have accepted it. The more people who "accept" it, the more the practice flourishes and grows.

DUI, terrorism, and child molestation fall into a slightly different category of unacceptable behavior than product counterfeiting does . . . or at least they do for me. YMMV.

Back to reality. I'd contend that the majority . . . perhaps the vast majority . . . of people who buy counterfeit products do so knowingly or at least have a pretty good idea that that's what they're doing. Moral indignation carries people only so far. Then their pocketbooks take over . . .

 

[yexactly]

If you can fake a knife, you can fake a serial number, so that's no protection. Everything depends entirely on the model and how close the resemblance is. I have no trouble telling an SRM 710 from a Sebenza, and anyone who can't tell the difference — well, as the saying goes, a fool and his money are soon separated.

What edges over into fraud is when you make a nearly perfect copy of a Hermes bag, complete with correct logos but out of inferior materials, and then sell it on the street as the real thing.

The point of that article, and my point as well, is that when the differences are as obvious as the SRM 710 compared to a Sebenza, then there's no harm, no foul.

Agree with your main point 100%.

In the case of the branded fake.. Yes they can fake a serial # too. But here is a possible implementation of a serial number and ownership registry system using the example of the Sebenza:

> each Sebenza gets a serial number stamped on the handle and/or blade

> the box contains the birth card and includes the serial # and a authentication #.. And says 'Go to Chris Reeve.com to verify the authenticity of this knife.. You go to Chris Reeve.com and it asks for the serial#, authentication #, birthday, and your email address.. Since only Chris reeve knows which serial# is tied to which authentication#.. they can immediately verify that the knife is authentic

> so let's say you want to sell the knife.. You would reenter all the information (including your email address which ties the knife to you).. And have the option to email the authenticity of the knife to any other email address.. so the potential buyer would get an email (from Chris Reeve) with the serial # only and confirmation that the knife is authentic.

> when you complete the sale you follow a similar process to transfer the knife to a different email address.

The big ordeal would be, how do you retroactively provide authentication for all the existing knives that currently do not have a serial#.. a possible solution is for Chris reeve to apply a serial# when people send them in for a Spa treatment... which a lot of sellers do when they want to resell the knife..

 

[B34NS]

So you wouldn't buy a modern Nessmuk or Schrader LB7?

Apple is a big company. Their workers aren't doing so hot.

Yet how many people on here will knock Chinese quality in a post from their iPhone.

[video=youtube;CW0DUg63lqU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU[/video]

 

[AreBeeBee]

...The big ordeal would be, how do you retroactively provide authentication for all the existing knives that currently do not have a serial#.. a possible solution is for Chris reeve to apply a serial# when people send them in for a Spa treatment... which a lot of sellers do when they want to resell the knife..

I strongly suspect that most knife purchases are not driven by true need — who needs a $400 knife? — but by whim, choice, or some other similar emotion. If you're buying $$$ knives, you quickly learn to research them and become an educated buyer. And you don't need serial numbers or certificates of authenticity (which can also be faked) to reassure you. Same goes for antiques, paintings, jewelry, etc. etc.

And if you're buying a $10 Chinese knife that sorta-kinda-maybe resembles that high-price one, well, you're out $10 if you make a mistake.

The problem I have is that any effective (= government enforced) legal regulation that actually could prevent fools from acting foolishly is infinitely worse than the problem itself is.

 

[yexactly]

I strongly suspect that most knife purchases are not driven by true need — who needs a $400 knife? — but by whim, choice, or some other similar emotion. If you're buying $$$ knives, you quickly learn to research them and become an educated buyer. And you don't need serial numbers or certificates of authenticity (which can also be faked) to reassure you. Same goes for antiques, paintings, jewelry, etc. etc.

And if you're buying a $10 Chinese knife that sorta-kinda-maybe resembles that high-price one, well, you're out $10 if you make a mistake.

The problem I have is that any effective (= government enforced) legal regulation that actually could prevent fools from acting foolishly is infinitely worse than the problem itself is.

http://chrisreeve.com/Counterfeits

Chris Reeve acknowledges that the problem is getting much worse as Counterfeits become very realistic.. would draw your attention to the last paragraph on Chris Reeve's own website:

"If you are in doubt, check with us – as far as possible we will authenticate for you."

The modifier 'as far as possible' indicates that in some cases, Chris Reeve themselves haven't been 100% sure. Some say the only way to tell is by cleaning off the lubricants and weighing the knife.. the knockoffs are still a couple grams off.

 

[bld522]

The problem I have is that any effective (= government enforced) legal regulation that actually could prevent fools from acting foolishly is infinitely worse than the problem itself is.

And then there's the thorny issue of defining what constitutes foolish behavior. Some would say, for example, that buying a $400 original when a $100 counterfeit is available is the foolish act. The real problem is, counterfeit knives still cut . . . maybe not as long and maybe not as well . . . but they still cut. If we could figure out a way to keep that from happening, maybe we could get this counterfeit issue under control.

 

[bhyde]

It's proven when some guy makes the same design out of the same materials to the same specs and charges 1/3 what the other guy charges. That proves that the reason said knife cost whatever it cost wasn't because of the material cost or cost of manufacture. It proves that there is a ton of mark up on a lot of these knives. But we all know that don't we?

Give me an example of what you are talking about..Spec for spec. Also tell me the process YOU used to determine the specs from the original to the copy. What lab did you send the materials to to verify the materials are the same? Titanium 6AL-4v is NOT Titanium CP2 as there is a big cost difference. Also, if it's possible..Tell me what company that made the copy so that I can ascertain if they are using pirated software to make their knockoffs..Software is expensive
I work in manufacturing...To narrow it down a bit more, I am a machinist that has run many different machines in my long career and have made many, many parts. Did I mention I also design on 4 different CAD systems? Seems I can offer some insight on this as I have the background to.

 

[bodog]

To the OP, it seems that it's OK to copy a design as long as collectors and users didn't overpay for their original product. If the original product was fairly priced to begin with or if the copies cost as much as the originals then I rarely see anyone making a stink over it. Notice I'm just talking about the design without getting into legitimate copyright, patent, or trademark issues which, rightfully so, are almost wholly detested.

 

[DPC]

I'm ok with copies that say they are copies, much like Wall handmade knives , that say they are styled after Randalls.

Even if I manufactured knives I wouldnt feel as bad is someone smaller or as big as me copied my design stating that it is based on my design.

I can understand the problems of big manufacturers copying designs from smaller makers, and appropiating them, which is just filthy and the worst kind of bad.

As a note I would like to expose a recent kick in the groin one of my fave brands gave me:

TOPS knives has copied a Kizlyar design not saying it is their original design but not stating the contraty either. This pisses me off. I'm a faithful fan of Kizlyar and it hurts me, because as a fan also of TOPS, if they told the truth I'd probably considered also buying their knife.

Here in the pictures you can see a TOPS "Wild pig hunter" and down two iterations of the Kizlyar model, the (more or less famous and very appreciated) Phoenix 1.

BIG dissapointment, TOPS!. How I love you... now I dont even know how many other designs you copied... TOPS makes awesome knives of their own, why copy others? (without saying)

I think this is dishonest, correct me if Im wrong.

 

[bhyde]

http://chrisreeve.com/Counterfeits

Chris Reeve acknowledges that the problem is getting much worse as Counterfeits become very realistic.. would draw your attention to the last paragraph on Chris Reeve's own website:

"If you are in doubt, check with us – as far as possible we will authenticate for you."

The modifier 'as far as possible' indicates that in some cases, Chris Reeve themselves haven't been 100% sure. Some say the only way to tell is by cleaning off the lubricants and weighing the knife.. the knockoffs are still a couple grams off.

It is possible to glean with nearly 100% certainty if the parts are theirs..It's only a matter of how much time and money they want to spend on it. Currently,.I am not aware of any copies that they are not able to verify this with from a casual inspection. There are alot of clues, but it would be a disservice to help the counterfeiters get better.

The interesting thing is, what amount of money do you think they spend on fixing and or inspecting the products of another company if and when the point in time comes where the difference is a net 0 other than proper fitting?

There are alot of good points that are mentioned here that I haven't thought of..So it has been educational

 

[bodog]

I'm ok with copies that say they are copies, much like Wall handmade knives , that say they are styled after Randalls.

Even if I manufactured knives I wouldnt feel as bad is someone smaller or as big as me copied my design stating that it is based on my design.

I can understand the problems of big manufacturers copying designs from smaller makers, and appropiating them, which is just filthy and the worst kind of bad.

As a note I would like to expose a recent kick in the groin one of my fave brands gave me:

TOPS knives has copied a Kizlyar design not saying it is their original design but not stating the contraty either. This pisses me off. I'm a faithful fan of Kizlyar and it hurts me, because as a fan also of TOPS, if they told the truth I'd probably considered also buying their knife.

Here in the pictures you can see a TOPS "Wild pig hunter" and down two iterations of the Kizlyar model, the (more or less famous and very appreciated) Phoenix 1.

BIG dissapointment, TOPS!. How I love you... now I dont even know how many other designs you copied... TOPS makes awesome knives of their own, why copy others? (without saying)

I think this is dishonest, correct me if Im wrong.

To be fair, there's only so many ways to design a pig sticker type of knife with a double guard like there's only so many ways to design a clamp type sharpener. Because the design itself is so specific, I don't believe that one manufacturer should claim exclusive rights to the design in perpetuity. There's fair to the point where the designers can claim credit for a decent length of time and then there's fair where design monopolies are busted. That line's in a different place for most people.

 

[DPC]

To be fair, there's only so many ways to design a pig sticker type of knife with a double guard like there's only so many ways to design a clamp type sharpener. Because the design itself is so specific, I don't believe that one manufacturer should claim exclusive rights to the design in perpetuity. There's fair to the point where the designers can claim credit for a decent length of time and then there's fair where design monopolies are busted. That line's in a different place for most people.

Welp yeah, I dont discredit your point, I just thought there are many many different pig sticker designs and many that have not been made yet. (And actually, even crap Mtech designs and really any other long and sharp blade make great pig stickers)

I'm not at all saying that Kizlyar has or should have the monopoly of the design, such as in other context, Ka-Bar with the USMC (Ontario, Camillus etc...) . What surprised me about TOPS is, first, that their design is 99.9 % (ok, maybe 99% because of the handle) the same, and second (and added to the first reason), that they shut up about the origin of the knife, like not wanting to tell everyone they copied it.

Maybe I'm looking too far into this, but I can even feel all the written information about the Wild pig hunter purposefully avoids mentioning it.

I'd be totally fine and I actually consider very cool if TOPS made knives inspired by Kizlyar, just because how much I love almost all Kizlyar designs and TOPS's quality. I just dont feel the way of making it is right.

 

[PURPLEDC]

Let it be known these are just my personal feelings on the subject and by no means do I have the desire to change anyones minds or prove anything. I honestly feel that clones and reproductions are not the extreme evil many portray them as. These are my reasonings.

1. Anyone buying a $100 clone of a $500+ knife is most likely not in the market for the $500 knife period. Whether it is a choice based on personal spending limits or simply not being able to afford the expensive knife in most cases if the person didnt buy the clone it doesnt mean that they would have spent the money on the original. But I have heard people who bought the clone and were so happy with the design they decided to save for the real deal. Even if they DONT the original company was never in line for that sale anyhow.

2. Too many times do i see a company or a maker complain that their design was stolen. Only when you do some digging you find they in fact have done the exact same thing either currently or in the recent past. Its not fair to whack the hand in the cookie jar while you yourself have crumbs on your face.

3. That leads me to what I feel is an unfair aura surrounding china as the sole evil in clone knives. Many make bigoted comments regarding china and them stealing designs. While it is true that china is probably the largest player in that market they are treated like they are the ONLY player in the market which isnt true. And what many many people will chastise china for they will give a pass to other makers and either create excuses or exercise a complete and total state of denial. Any time I have ever asked the question why is china evil but numerous other brands dont suffer the same criticism for the same actions and it NEVER gets answered.

4. I have a hard time accepting this topic as one of moral and ethical standards. When you use "law" "morals" and "ethics are the basis for your position it to me is paper thin if you are only applying this way of thinking to a single topic. If you only defend this cause in the world of knives then you show that the issue is not so important to you as is the specific application of the issue. Replication and cloning exists in every single tangible good you can think of. Do you buy generic items to save money? All of the generic items are based on brand name items. If you are picking and choosing which products are exempt from criticism then is it really about morals, ethics or even laws? People who really support a certain cause instill that in everything they do and not just cherry pick the topic of which they have the most emotional involvement.

I have many more reasons why I dont feel this topic is as cut and dry as many would like to believe it is but Its really pointless to point them all out. Not to mention that no matter how much logic or reason you apply to the argument it is one topic that you simply cant discuss without emotions eventually influencing ones responses. The one thing I think is absolutely wrong is just how we are handling the issue. For years many have simply taken the stance that we should simply boycott these companies and refuse to buy their product and it will go away. I feel this way of handling it is exactly why clones have become the force they have become. Most who speak against them have little to no experience with the higher quality replicas available because their moral and ethical standards prevent them from attempting to gain first hand knowledge of what they are trying to speak out against. And when you turn a bline eye and a deaf ear to a problem all it does is grow and become a bigger problem.

Guitar companies in the 70's all the way up to today have been combating the replica and counterfeit markets for decades. Some companies went bankrupt trying to enforce patents and trademarks. The one thing that remains a constant despite decades and millions of dollars gone trying to protect intellectual property? The counterfeits never went away. And the quality kept going up. So guitar companies like gibson and jackson decided to take a negative and turn it into a positive. They chose to work with these "thieves" and have them create an import line. Gibson had Orville by gibson and jackon had jackson stars. These products were identical to the USA made counterparts in materials, designs and quality. Often costing hundreds less than the item they were cloning. People bought them, loved them. Instead of gibson spending millions trying to get them to stop making guitars like theirs they authorized the use of their designs and started taking a piece of the pie. It didnt hurt their USA made sales as there always has been and always will be a demand for USA produced products even if materials and execution were identical.

I think the biggest mistake companies are making when creating an import line is skimping on materials and quality. In theory its a good idea. If you only use entry level materials and intentionally keep the quality down it creates this image in the publics mind that that is pinnacle of what they are capable of. People will want to buy the USA product because they can visibly and physically tell the difference between the products. But then companies like Reate, Kizer and even spyderco with its utilizing Joti Industries in taiwan show that asian production has come a long way and that they can make a superior product if allowed to do so. I think companies are simply allowing too large of a quality gap between the domestic and import product lines. USA made products sell because "USA made" means something to people. I truly believe that if benchmade made the exact same knife made from the exact materials in both china and the USA that both products would sell even if in completely different price brackets. The chinese model would sell because it represents value and the USA model would still appeal to those who will pay a premium for supporting USA manufacturing.

If you look at nearly all issues where a certain demographic are engaging in activities that most would consider taboo fighting them legally and offensively usually never results in permanent solution. Its like the concept of a hydra. You cut off one head and two grow back in its place. The more you fight it the stronger it gets. Rehabilitation of these activities is to me a better solution. To stop poaching in african countries they have started programs to get poachers jobs protecting the animals instead of killing them. In columbia cocaine and marijuana farmers have been rehabilitated into coffee farmers. And in south america and parts of asia many fear venomous snakes and used to kill them on site. Often getting bit and evenomated. Many of these people have been taught how to wrangle snakes and instead of kiling them have learned to properly handle the animals, extract venom and sell it to research groups for the development of antivenom. The snakes live, the people live and it turns a huge negative into a positive. Not to mention now those areas have access to antivenom increasing survival rates. The subject of knives is not identical but many view it as a problem. And I cant deny that there are some serious negatives to clones if they are abused and used in a manner that will deceive people. But we have to ask ourselves if the way we have been handling it has been doing more harm than good and if there is a different approach we could take to maybe change that.

 

[DPC]

Damn...

I wish Busse copied every other single manufacturer's designs.....

 

[choombak]

DUI, terrorism, and child molestation fall into a slightly different category of unacceptable behavior than product counterfeiting does . . . or at least they do for me. YMMV.

Back to reality. I'd contend that the majority . . . perhaps the vast majority . . . of people who buy counterfeit products do so knowingly or at least have a pretty good idea that that's what they're doing. Moral indignation carries people only so far. Then their pocketbooks take over . . .

Hmmm... IMO, there aren't shades of wrong - it is either right or wrong. How do you know the money made by selling counterfeit knives isn't pumped into another criminal enterprise involved in terrorism? At least I don't. Many such small profits made with not-so-honest means end up in a bigger pool of crime more often than not, and it is hardly surprising non-democratic countries involved in such acts.

Counterfeit knives, and knives that look like a reputed knife (inspired, homage) without acknowledging the original maker is a NO GO for me. And I do not support dealers who sell such homages as well. It's not political, just a moral stand I take. If I can't afford the real deal, I won't buy it. Living beyond ones means isn't exactly a good lesson especially if you have kids! ;-)

 

[RX-79G]

Is the nessmuk or the schrade still being manufactured by the originating company?
Are any patents from a defunct company still enforceable?

I asked because this quote doesn't really jive with this quote:

Is it moral to copy anothers design so closely, even though devoid of trademark? Is it moral to make your money on the backs of those legitimate companies and designers whose hard work to bring the item to market you had no hand, time or capital invested in?

Is it about who's dead or what's still being manufactured, or is it about the morals of making money on someone else's design? I can't tell which one you think is important from these two very different quotes.