Which came first?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its your thread. Clearly you are unwilling to make any point in it. I'm not sure what one calls doing that.

I'm out.
 
Jesus. If you want to make that kind of argument, you might as well ask are all companies ripping each other off because they use steel for blades and all have handles. Its an inlay. Its not a design feature. Its ornamentation. And many makers have done it over the years. Most modern tactical folders share at least a few design elements found in other knives. Rarely are there truly unique ideas. But when there are they are patented. kevin john has stolen designs. But this knife is not a copy of any one piece of work. Much like most knives in the production world it has inspirations due to current trends in knife making.
 
bodog said:
Agreed. Most I can't even tell the difference between the morality and legality of cloning, copying, and counterfeiting. They I like who they I like and find any and all ways to justify their my decisions regardless of logic or even basic desire to understand what is what and why. And a lot I just troll. No reason for it, they I just come in and crap all over everything without any real reason other than they've I've simply decided to make this specific issue or that their my mark.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for ya.
 
There is still some worthwhile discussion here. But enough with the insults.
Address the question, rather than trolling one another.
 
chester22 said:
My problem with legitimacy in these China Clone Factories is who will hold them accountable for making sure they're Using the said materials used and are made in an ethical way. Like saying it's M390 but use AUS8... They don't follow the same rules and regulations we do. Recently CRKT had S30V Knives made and then they ended up being 1075 carbon steel.
Click to expand...

Ultimately, the company that hires them will be responsible and accountable for the accuracy of the description of the contents of their products. It is easy to blame Chinese factories for not being honest about materials, but this kind of thing has been happening since humans first started making products for sale to other humans.
The company that does the hiring just has to do frequent spot checks and/or have someone on the ground in China. This is of course assuming they are interested in accurately reporting the materials used anyway.

Again, the real issue is the temptation of ghost production, once they have the IP and permission to use it, it will be difficult to resist the lure of easy money using their old distribution networks and letting someone else basically pay for the manufacturing.
 
PURPLEDC said:
Jesus. If you want to make that kind of argument, you might as well ask are all companies ripping each other off because they use steel for blades and all have handles. Its an inlay. Its not a design feature. Its ornamentation. And many makers have done it over the years. Most modern tactical folders share at least a few design elements found in other knives. Rarely are there truly unique ideas. But when there are they are patented. kevin john has stolen designs. But this knife is not a copy of any one piece of work. Much like most knives in the production world it has inspirations due to current trends in knife making.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've made that point a couple of times recently.
 
I'm also not sure where or why this thread exists.

The comparison between the KJ and the ZT is a huge stretch, unless you've never seen a blade inlay before in your life. The appropriate comparison is with the Microtechs it was clearly designed to resemble. Look at the handle. Nothing in common with the ZT.

If you're trying to argue they're equivalent because they both "stole" the blade inlay idea from somebody else and that they're thus morally equivalent you're ignoring the fact that inlaid materials is pretty old hat. Microtech has made a thing of it by doing it very well across their custom and semicustom lines, but they weren't the first to inlay material in a blade. What's also being ignored is what ZT did which is actually (to my knowledge) new and unique, which was the floating appearance. That hasn't been done before and nobody has bothered to copy it. So I'm really not sure why we're discussing it.

If you're trying to argue that KJ must have a crack team of reverse engineers and machinists, that may be true, but remember that the MT SOCOM Bravo has been out for a while, and the Chinese factories have been pumping out fakes for a whole. It's not a huge stretch for them to make a new model that incorporates the design cues of the Bravo with a slightly different shape and an upgraded blade with inlay.

I don't see ANY relationship at all between the KJ attacker and the 0999 from a design perspective. You'll know it when KJ or Adai or Whatever decides to fake the 0999 because it will be a fake 0999.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
DrFish said:
I'm also not sure where or why this thread exists.

The comparison between the KJ and the ZT is a huge stretch, unless you've never seen a blade inlay before in your life. The appropriate comparison is with the Microtechs it was clearly designed to resemble. Look at the handle. Nothing in common with the ZT.

If you're trying to argue they're equivalent because they both "stole" the blade inlay idea from somebody else and that they're thus morally equivalent you're ignoring the fact that inlaid materials is pretty old hat. Microtech has made a thing of it by doing it very well across their custom and semicustom lines, but they weren't the first to inlay material in a blade. What's also being ignored is what ZT did which is actually (to my knowledge) new and unique, which was the floating appearance. That hasn't been done before and nobody has bothered to copy it. So I'm really not sure why we're discussing it.

If you're trying to argue that KJ must have a crack team of reverse engineers and machinists, that may be true, but remember that the MT SOCOM Bravo has been out for a while, and the Chinese factories have been pumping out fakes for a whole. It's not a huge stretch for them to make a new model that incorporates the design cues of the Bravo with a slightly different shape and an upgraded blade with inlay.

I don't see ANY relationship at all between the KJ attacker and the 0999 from a design perspective. You'll know it when KJ or Adai or Whatever decides to fake the 0999 because it will be a fake 0999.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Those are the exact questions I have been trying to raise since the very beginning of this thread, but you have stated them much better than I have.

Unfortunately, so far, the answer to each of those questions has been invariably "You're a troll." or "Stop being obtuse."

All I have been trying to figure out is is what the premise of this thread is. I swear to Scagel, I don't know if bodog is arguing that you cant steal a design element, or that you can steal a design element, or that KJ or ZT or both did.

I have repeatedly stated how I feel about the subject

marcinek said:
OK. I will make a clear definitive statement. I don't like KJ. They rip stuff off. I certainly appreciate any argument that backs that feeling up.
Click to expand...

But I would love for someone to explain to me what bodog's premise is. Is it that KJ should do what Reate did? Then why did he wait until 11 posts in to mention them for the first time?

I would love to address the question. I just have no idea what it is.
 
marcinek said:
(...)But I would love for someone to explain to me what bodog's premise is. Is it that KJ should do what Reate did? Then why did he wait until 11 posts in to mention them for the first time?

I would love to address the question. I just have no idea what it is.
Click to expand...

I believe Bodog's thread title and example of a ZT vs KJ design feature is throwing people off the thrust of his actual argument... 'muddied the waters' as it were.

He's saying that the knife producing entity known as 'Kevin John' has clearly demonstrated its ability to tool-up lickety split and pump out a product of decent quality. He is suggesting that if given legitimate and properly licensed work, KJ might abandon the practice of making counterfeit/copied/cloned knives.

Bodog is just spit-balling an idea of how to help remedy the Chinese knock-off problem.

That's how I read the OP, anyway.

-Brett
 
timberweasel said:
I believe Bodog's thread title and example of a ZT vs KJ design feature is throwing people off the thrust of his actual argument... 'muddied the waters' as it were.

He's saying that the knife producing entity known as 'Kevin John' has clearly demonstrated its ability to tool-up lickety split and pump out a product of decent quality. He is suggesting that if given legitimate and properly licensed work, KJ might abandon the practice of making counterfeit/copied/cloned knives.

Bodog is just spit-balling an idea of how to help remedy the Chinese knock-off problem.

That's how I read the OP, anyway.

-Brett
Click to expand...

Yep, pretty much.
 
timberweasel said:
I believe Bodog's thread title and example of a ZT vs KJ design feature is throwing people off the thrust of his actual argument... 'muddied the waters' as it were.

He's saying that the knife producing entity known as 'Kevin John' has clearly demonstrated its ability to tool-up lickety split and pump out a product of decent quality. He is suggesting that if given legitimate and properly licensed work, KJ might abandon the practice of making counterfeit/copied/cloned knives.

Bodog is just spit-balling an idea of how to help remedy the Chinese knock-off problem.

That's how I read the OP, anyway.

-Brett
Click to expand...

OK. That makes sense. I don't get why the OP was all about KJ "stealing" from ZT...dont know what that has to do with that at all. Seems he could have just opened with what he waited until post 11 to start talking about, i.e., the "Reate" example and how they changed their model and how that story could be "taken to heart" by some of the more "frowned upon" manufacturers.

If that's what he was going for, shame he just didn't do that, and instead "muddied the waters" while throwing around claims of "trolling" and "obtuse" instead. We didn't muddy them.

It's a valid point. Should have just said it.

That said, as long as companies like KJ and Ganzo make money and people buy their stuff (including people here), there's no real reason to change their model. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
Mo2 said:
edit original post and put Timberweasels post in its place. cause i dont know why this thread exists otherwise.
Click to expand...

Or maybe he's just capable of following a conversation without trying to attach ulterior motives to it and creating controversy for controversy's sake. Unless there was some other reason him and the mods could read it for what it was but a handful of other guys couldn't.
 
timberweasel said:
I believe Bodog's thread title and example of a ZT vs KJ design feature is throwing people off the thrust of his actual argument... 'muddied the waters' as it were.

He's saying that the knife producing entity known as 'Kevin John' has clearly demonstrated its ability to tool-up lickety split and pump out a product of decent quality. He is suggesting that if given legitimate and properly licensed work, KJ might abandon the practice of making counterfeit/copied/cloned knives.

Bodog is just spit-balling an idea of how to help remedy the Chinese knock-off problem.

That's how I read the OP, anyway.

-Brett
Click to expand...

Yes, but this observation is predicated on the idea that the KJ attacker is their take on the 0999, thus showing their rapid capability. Which is isnt.

That's not to say they can't move fast, but honestly, the only case I can think of where a clone of a highly original design came out in very rapid succession from the original being made available was the Decepticon. And that was contract manufactured in China to begin with so I suspect there was a lot of second shift manufacturing happening there.

Really though, with technology these days, all it takes is for them to have one design specimen to work from and for relatively simple parts like knives it is truly trivial for them to make copies. The only questions are how good a copy and what price point. I don't see it as any kind of manufacturing triumph.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
bodog said:
Or maybe he's just capable of following a conversation without trying to attach ulterior motives to it and creating controversy for controversy's sake. Unless there was some other reason him and the mods could read it for what it was but a handful of other guys couldn't.
Click to expand...

We can't read your mind.

Either post in a clear and concise manner, or don't post at all. I'm pretty sure that you were taking both sides of the argument so that you weren't wrong at any time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top