Which came first?

[craytab]

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

Well, it is clear what this thread is about. Glad I stayed away. Have fun gents!

 

[Velitrius]

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

Now THIS I can deal with. Thank you timberweasel.

I recall that back a few years ago, Mike Turber himself launched a project to address something akin to this. In a nutshell, he was heading to China to get a factory to quit selling crap knockoffs and start making knives in collaboration with quality designers and make them with some semblance of quality. This might be oversimplified a bit, but here are a couple of threads that offer up a history.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...-and-what-I-am-doing-about-it?highlight=China

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...t-I-am-doing-about-it-Part-II?highlight=China

There are other threads that address the project. I simply searched for posts by Mike Turber with keyword "China". You can do the same if interested.

I don't know how it turned out, or if it even did turn out. I'm not interested enough to do the research, but I'd listen to a synopsis if there is one.

 

[fateone]

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.

He is also referring to himself in third person. If he starts referring to himself as "The Bodog"....
I think we are all dumber for having participated in this thread. Don't feed the trolls.. Don't feed the trolls... don't feed the trolls... must remember this.

 

[bodog]

He is also referring to himself in third person. If he starts referring to himself as "The Bodog"....
I think we are all dumber for having participated in this thread. Don't feed the trolls.. Don't feed the trolls... don't feed the trolls... must remember this.

What do you think you're doing right now?

 

[bodog]

He is also referring to himself in third person. If he starts referring to himself as "The Bodog"....
I think we are all dumber for having participated in this thread. Don't feed the trolls.. Don't feed the trolls... don't feed the trolls... must remember this.

And good God man. Some of you guys really are pulling at strings. It SHOULD have been obvious to anyone with any kind of intelligence that I was referring to Timberweasel in the post you're referring to.

 

[Mo2]

ZT designers dont pay attention to KJ or any of those not relevant brands. so stop assuming they do.

 

[PURPLEDC]

Yeah, I've made that point a couple of times recently.

Well there was several points in that post so which are you referring to? Either way if you have answered all your own questions and I'm just repeating what you all ready know then the point of this thread seems to be exactly what I had suspected. To lure others into the same conversations we have on what seems to be a regular basis.

 

[PURPLEDC]

ZT designers dont pay attention to KJ or any of those not relevant brands. so stop assuming they do.

Well they do pay attention. But not to rip them off. Its usually to see what a Chinese brand has ripped off from them. I used to criticize ZT for their production versions of limited editions rarely being identical to the prototypes shown at shot or blade. But considering how fast the counterfeiters are at getting to market it makes a lot more sense to me why they wont show the final version from the onset.

 

[JuJu-]

Well there was several points in that post so which are you referring to? Either way if you have answered all your own questions and I'm just repeating what you all ready know then the point of this thread seems to be exactly what I had suspected. To lure others into the same conversations we have on what seems to be a regular basis.

Yes, and I must say that the way he progressed this thread as he usually does it always comes back to being something negative about a certain company. Has been for the last 3 yrs. He's really good at trolling on another level at this point. He's evolved into some sort of super troll.

He's been wishy washy this whole thread and the one that preceded it. He's been arguing with himself and answering his own questions. This could have been a good thread had he not reverted to his usual ways. I guess it was inevitable. At this point I think it's clear that we should probably let this one die out.

 

[bodog]

Well there was several points in that post so which are you referring to? Either way if you have answered all your own questions and I'm just repeating what you all ready know then the point of this thread seems to be exactly what I had suspected. To lure others into the same conversations we have on what seems to be a regular basis.

I was agreeing with you. Not saying you were being repetitive. What you said that I was referring to should probably be said several more times in several more threads by several more people.

 

[timberweasel]

When it comes to counterfeit culture, the rabbit-hole is deep. China seems to have a very different business mind-set that, generally speaking, makes little distinction between a patented widget and generic goods. Product is product and product is profit. Knives, clothing, electronics, even pharmaceuticals; nothing is verboten and the courts that respect, uphold, and enforce IP law (and more importantly, product standards for public safety) are far away...

I'll just stop there so I don't wander too far into political territory.

Giving a manufacturer who engages in shady business practices a legitimate contract is like giving a crackhead money for rent on a pinky-swear that they won't use it to buy drugs.

Just my opinion...

-Brett

 

[bodog]

When it comes to counterfeit culture, the rabbit-hole is deep. China seems to have a very different business mind-set that, generally speaking, makes little distinction between a patented widget and generic goods. Product is product and product is profit. Knives, clothing, electronics, even pharmaceuticals; nothing is verboten and the courts that respect, uphold, and enforce IP law (and more importantly, product standards for public safety) are far away...

I'll just stop there so I don't wander too far into political territory.

Giving a manufacturer who engages in shady business practices a legitimate contract is like giving a crackhead money for rent on a pinky-swear that they won't use it to buy drugs.

Just my opinion...

-Brett

So you're saying reate needs to be and will be held accountable for their past crimes without any chance whatsoever to redeem themselves?

 

[timberweasel]

So you're saying reate needs to be and will be held accountable for their past crimes without any chance whatsoever to redeem themselves?

Come on, Bodog. I think I gave your OP a fair read and would appreciate a little reciprocal courtesy. Nowhere in my post did I mention ReaTe. I know nothing about them and cannot comment on their practices.

-Brett

 

[bodog]

Come on, Bodog. I think I gave your OP a fair read and would appreciate a little reciprocal courtesy. Nowhere in my post did I mention ReaTe. I know nothing about them and cannot comment on their practices.

-Brett

No offense intended with that last post. They have done this:

"engages in shady business practices"

Or at least their designer and factories they use did. I don't think they're currently akin to a crackhead operating on a pinky-swear. They seem to be doing their damnedest to separate from that past. If they can, others can too, given the right motivation. We should all encourage them to get better.

You can't rehab a criminal if all he ever hears and thinks about is how he won't/can't get better. I'm not saying they read BF and will change based on a thread like this but maybe it'll give a company who does the idea. Several mid-tech producers use these same factories but that's obviously not enough. It needs to be a BIG company, bigger than spyderco even. More like Buck, Gerber, or Kershaw. Shoot, even if Leatherman jumped into the knife world with some high quality offerings then I'd bet the name recognition and retail paths already made could push the idea of higher quality knives into the everyday person's mind. Most people think of "high priced, high quality" knives and the only thing they can think of is a couple of $100 benchmades.

Make a nice stand in Cabela's and Bass Pro showing some really good fixed blade knives and some $150 folders with some of these bells and whistles for people to play with and I think they'd change the game. Especially if they don't go overboard with oddball designs or ugly cosmetics.

 

[timberweasel]

No offense intended with that last post. They have done this:

"engages in shady business practices"

Or at least their designer and factories they use did. I don't think they're currently akin to a crackhead operating on a pinky-swear. They seem to be doing their damnedest to separate from that past. If they can, others can too, given the right motivation. We should all encourage them to get better.

You can't rehab a criminal if all he ever hears and thinks about is how he won't/can't get better. (...)

Bodog, I have specifically asked you for a little reciprocal courtesy and you continue to straw man my post as an argument against ReaTe and now some kind of anti-rehabilitation rhetoric. Now I don't think you're being deliberately obtuse, but you are struggling to frame your own narrative.

On that note, I reckon I'm done here.

Good luck with your thread and have a Happy Christmas.

-Brett

 

[Thomas Linton]

It's a brand, not the name of an entity. It, like so many others, was probably selected to suggest a Western origin for Asian goods. You have no idea who makes the knives or of what materials. Hopefully, if you buy Kevin John you get what you deserve. Getting worse than you deserve would be a shame.

 

[ursamajor]

I suspect it would be difficult to truly legitimize any company that started off by counterfeiting/cloning since they would well know could always make more money with ghost production going out the back door while they are sending genuine items out the front door. This is already a huge problem in China, and not just in the knife industry.

Bodog seems to have a penchant for casually stating ZT stole IP at every opportunity, so it is not surprising that people's feathers get ruffled.

If decorative carbon fiber inlays on blades were actually patentable, I doubt it would be defensible since inlays have existed in one form or another in knives and other crafts for a very long time. Its application to a knife blade is obvious, so saying it was a stolen idea is silly. In the case of the 0999, I don't know technically if you could call it an inlay since the channel and cutouts give it a floating appearance. The final production version has the float and a metal inlay in the carbon fiber which actually helps show the difference. So saying it is a stolen idea is pretty weak.

[edit: corrected stupid autocorrection of bodog.]

That would mean Smith and Wesson would have been very difficult to legitimize.

RCA too. Microsoft... the list of major American companies that made their way by ripping off intellectual property is staggering. China has a LONG way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kneedeep]

That would mean Smith and Wesson would have been very difficult to legitimize.

RCA too. Microsoft... the list of major American companies that made their way by ripping off intellectual property is staggering. China has a LONG way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are completely missing my point. I wasn't addressing stealing IP so much as pointing out the issue of companies that have been tasked/authorized by the IP holder to build a product, sending said product out the back door.

 

[Thomas Linton]

That would mean Smith and Wesson would have been very difficult to legitimize.

RCA too. Microsoft... the list of major American companies that made their way by ripping off intellectual property is staggering. China has a LONG way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And you know this all how?

Unless there is some "secret" history, you are dead wrong about Smith & Wesson.

 

[ursamajor]

And you know this all how?

Unless there is some "secret" history, you are dead wrong about Smith & Wesson.

Even in the modern era, Smith and Wesson completely ripped off Glock so bad, that they did not even waste legal fees on trying to defend themselves in the lawsuit. They are well known for ripping off the most innovative features and patents of multiple manufacturers, and putting them into their firearms.

Like Kevin John, they make their rip offs VERY well, but they are still rip offs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk