Which came first?

It's been said time and again. But since you asked:

1) I thought ZT probably thought of the whole CF insert and KJ stole the idea and the ramped up production of stolen idea with a knife that does look quite similar to the 0999. I was incorrect about ZT coming up with that idea.
2) If KJ can ramp up production of what appears to be a well made knife with really good reviews from those who've handled and used the knife within 6 months, that's fast. Now that timeframe is moot because it looks like they didn't copy the design from ZT.
3) If these cloning factories can produce knives that by all accounts are original and with as much quality as anyone else, then maybe a company with solid financial backing could co-opt a company like KJ, get them to stop making counterfeits and produce original designs on their behalf.
4) aside from people trolling, it's been stated that reate appears to have broken themselves of making counterfeits. With statements from Reate reps linked.
5) If all they need is financial incentive, which is all they're interested in anyway, maybe some decent company could contract with them and provide the same type of oversight that Spyderco or whoever gives their overseas contract facilities.
6) There's no denying that some of these companies really do possess skills and ingenuity. How can we as a consumer base tap into that skill and ingenuity and get them to stop staying on the wrong side of things and provide knives that people would feel okay carrying?

 

So how many carbon fiber blade inlays does it take to be an accepted design feature and not a copy and how many framelocks need to be produced before it's no longer copying Chris Reeve?

The argument is valid, although off topic.

 

Funny, I was saying the same thing in the other thread. People were saying things shouldn't be copies at all. SMH.

 

But that's the deal, these knives have been reviewed and seem to be really well done. It's not like they're ONLY pushing garbage out. Unless by garbage you just mean counterfeits in general, and we can agree on that.

 

Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

Agreed. Most can't even tell the difference between the morality and legality of cloning, copying, and counterfeiting. They like who they like and find any and all ways to justify their decisions regardless of logic or even basic desire to understand what is what and why. And a lot just troll. No reason for it, they just come in and crap all over everything without any real reason other than they've simply decided to make this specific issue or that their mark.

 

• 
  Support BladeForums!
  Paid memberships don't see ads!

Why don't you post your own opinion of the issue instead of trying to incite an argument? Do YOU believe ZT stole the design and do YOU believe ZT should be held in the same regard as KJ? Regardless of whatever your answer is, it's better left in another thread because that's not what this one is about. All you're doing is trying to get me to equate this thread and the other. If my answer matches your preconceptions then you'll just give a loud HAHA and duck out like you always do. If it doesn't then you'll say there's some kind of conspiracy. Either way, if you feel strongly about it then create your own thread with a poll:

If ZT copies a design feature from someone else are they as bad as Kevin John knives?
1) Yes
2) No

You'd have your answers. But instead you're trying to dig up some kind of bullcrap in this thread when it's ALREADY BEEN DETERMINED that the very first post was based on my incorrect assumption that ZT created the idea for a carbon fiber blade insert. They didn't and now everyone is creating defenses for ZT when that's not even the gist of the thread. Who freaking cares who created the carbon fiber insert? If it wasn't ZT and it wasn't debuted in June, 2016 then really, what does it matter? ZT copied an idea, that's nothing new to the knife world. I harped and harped about that in another thread and said other companies shouldn't be held to some other higher standard. What are you trying to accomplish? If someone copies something and there's no legal or outright moral infringement, who cares? I said that repeatedly in the last thread and i still feel the same. I said ZT is a business and they're doing things businesses do. I still believe that. I said that's a fact of life and I still believe that. I said it's nothing to get worked up about and I still believe that. So what's your end goal? To incite others to argue AGAIN about that? Are you just some pimply nerd getting his jollies from inciting arguments or do you have ANYTHING at all to truly contribute? Do you have ANY valid opinion worth sharing and discussing or is it all just trying to cause discord? For God's sake man, you're obviously an intelligent guy who can see what you're doing, why don't you funnel that into some kind of positive and share your opinion? It doesn't matter if everyone likes it or agrees with you but it's a damned sight better than whatever it is you normally do on this board.