1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

  2. Click here to enter the drawing for your chance to win a Kizer 1034A1 Gingrich Bush Knife & Ka-Bar Dozier Folding Hunter, , Bladeforums.com swag or memberships!

    Be sure to read the rules before entering, then help us decide next week's giveaway by hitting the poll in that thread! Entries close at midnight, Saturday Sept 7!

    Once the entries close, we'll live stream the drawing on Sunday, Sept 8 at 5PM Eastern. Tune in to our YouTube channel TheRealBladeForums for a chance to win bonus prizes!

    Questions? Comments? Post in the discussion thread here

Which came first?

Discussion in 'General Knife Discussion' started by bodog, Dec 19, 2016.

  1. marcinek

    marcinek

    Jan 9, 2007
    Look. Your argument against KJ can be applied to ZT. I didn't open the thread. I didn't make the argument. I just followed it to its logical conclusion.
     
  2. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    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?
     
  3. Blues Bender

    Blues Bender Gold Member Gold Member

    Feb 27, 2014
    I feel that this thread has evolved into an entirely new discussion, but here's my take on some of this...

     
  4. kneedeep

    kneedeep

    Jan 28, 2007
    If the argument is based on the CF in the blade, the argument against KJ or ZT is deeply flawed from the start since the CF is just an embellishment and isn't really protected. There is plenty of prior art and application of inlays to the blade is obvious when you consider any other type of inlay. Inlays in the blade wouldn't be copying since it is simply using a well known technique that applies to many crafts.

    As I previously mentioned the execution of the inlay on the 0999 does actually seem novel since it actually utilizes an inlay as well as a technique that differentiates from an inlay.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  5. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    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.
     
  6. greeenie

    greeenie

    Nov 27, 2012
    By that logic, how many pickup trucks need be made before they're not copying the model T?

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
     
  7. Blues Bender

    Blues Bender Gold Member Gold Member

    Feb 27, 2014
    Nice red herring...

    "The 0999 has a pocket clip and a flipper tab! I told you that ZT is trying to ripoff Sal Glesser and Kit Carson!"
     
  8. oregonknifenerd

    oregonknifenerd

    Dec 5, 2011
    Zero... infinite... it looks like some people here think it is at one end or the other. Fortunately we have patents and intellectual property laws. Unfortunately, enforcing them internationally can be difficult.

    IP law hasn't caught up with technology, but it isn't as gray as people are portraying it in this thread. "Copying" without legal backing is speculative opinion. You, or I, or anyone may think something looks similar or uses a similar technique, but that doesn't make it copying nor are similarities always intentional.

    Companies may unintentionally create something similar that is patent protected. That doesn't then make it legal. KAI is not willfully, knowingly, or intentionally violating patents, and has every right to defend their own patents. Some in China are violating patents with shameful disregard. The issues should be decided by the courts and individuals involved, not a bunch of Internet whiners and attention seekers.
     
  9. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    Funny, I was saying the same thing in the other thread. People were saying things shouldn't be copies at all. SMH.
     
  10. kneedeep

    kneedeep

    Jan 28, 2007
    Not off topic since you brought it up needlessly in your original post. Specific examples of what you claim are one company ripping off another company were completely unnecessary if the goal of this thread was to discuss turning rampant counterfeiting/cloning companies into legit ones by hiring them.

    You also seemed to have difficulty understanding my point which was that the inlays are an embellishment or decoration with no real function and therefore cannot be patent protected. Since it is a utilization of a well known and commonly practiced technique, saying one is ripping off another is ridiculous. If the shape of the inserts were Identical you might have an argument. Frame locks and sub-frame locks on the other hand are functional and although serve the same purpose, achieve it through completely different construction and manufacturing method. So go ahead and beat that dead horse again.

    Also it is interesting that you chose the dead horse over commenting on my contribution to the purported purpose of this thread.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  11. Reignman

    Reignman

    Oct 18, 2012
    :D more arguments over the legitimacy of an overseas company which could easily pump out high end knives if they didn't make WAYYYY more money pumping out garbage.
     
  12. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    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.
     
  13. Scurvy092

    Scurvy092

    Jan 31, 2012
    [​IMG]
     
  14. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    Thanks for the enlightenment.
     
  15. marcinek

    marcinek

    Jan 9, 2007
    Yes, but since it is not KJs idea, they took it from somebody. And if its not ZTs idea, they took it from somebody too.

    So do you feel that: 1) KJ stole it, but ZT didnt; 2) they both did; or 3) neither did?

    All I've been trying get out of you from the beginning. And if you dont want to to come out and say...then why not?
     
  16. greeenie

    greeenie

    Nov 27, 2012
    Because troll. He Ramps up, plays the slander game, backs down and doesn't make sense. This whole thread should already be locked

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
     
  17. Reignman

    Reignman

    Oct 18, 2012
    I can't knock their build quality on the "clones"... the high end ones anyway.. but some of the pseudo intellectuals in here can't differentiate the fact that agreeing the quality of it is there isn't condoning them counterfeiting knives which is bullstuff,
     
  18. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    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.
     
  19. greeenie

    greeenie

    Nov 27, 2012
    You realize you just described yourself right

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
     
  20. bodog

    bodog Banned BANNED

    Dec 15, 2013
    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.
     

Share This Page