wow, its amazing how crap companies get away with stuff like this

[Ankerson]

If you mean you'll never say a word as long as someone agrees with you, then yeah, that seems like a fair assessment . It certainly doesn't seem that you particularly care whether they're in the right or not.

Really? This knife was around before 1957?

Would you care to back that up? From what I've read, this knife was originally designed by Deane H. Russell and produced by Grohmann Knives Ltd. You're saying someone else made this knife prior to Misters Russell and Grohmann?

That basic design has been around for around 100 years.....

I remember seeing a few at an antique knife show about 20 years ago, they were very old...

His is a refined design, better than what I saw.

That is what usually happens, people get ideas and improve on them or take ideas from a few different places and use them etc...

The Bowie Knife is a prime example of this happening, people used to use beefed up butcher knives out in the woods long before the Bowie ever was... That is what the Bowie knife really was that Jim Bowie carried, a beefed up Butcher knife with a few refinements, but it was just a thick butcher knife.

 

[Dorito Monk]

That basic design has been around for around 100 years.....

I remember seeing a few at an antique knife show about 20 years ago, they were very old...

His is a refined design, better than what I saw.

That is what usually happens, people get ideas and improve on them or take ideas from a few different places and use them etc...

The Bowie Knife is a prime example of this happening, people used to use beefed up butcher knives out in the woods long before the Bowie ever was...

You saw a couple of knives that had the same basic design that were 'very old'?

Frankly, that's a damned suspicious description. What do you mean by 'the same basic design'? Do you mean the knives you saw had a handle, a blade, and performed vaguely the same functions as the 1950's D.H. Russell Design? Or do you perhaps mean that they had the exact same shape and proportions as the Grohmann model 1, as is the issue with the Cold Steel knockoff (which, by the way, Cold Steel fully acknowledges "takes inspiration from a 1950’s classic. It has all the features that made the original an award-winning, international favorite")?

 

[Ankerson]

You saw a couple of knives that had the same basic design that were 'very old'?

Frankly, that's a damned suspicious description. What do you mean by 'the same basic design'? Do you mean the knives you saw had a handle, a blade, and performed vaguely the same functions as the 1950's D.H. Russell Design? Or do you perhaps mean that they had the exact same shape and proportions as the Grohmann model 1, as is the issue with the Cold Steel knockoff (which, by the way, Cold Steel fully acknowledges "takes inspiration from a 1950’s classic. It has all the features that made the original an award-winning, international favorite")?

I meant close, but not exact, the two I saw were different from each other also, but the blade shapes were very similar to the one he made. The handles were different in that they were thicker and straighter.

Like I stated many designs are based off other ideas and either combined and or improved on.

Yes I know that the CS vers was inspired by his vers of the knife and states it on their website.

 

[sqoon]

Some nobody company stealing a CS design and selling it for peanuts is no big deal. Ask Spyderco. It happens all the time. CS stealing other designs and selling them for what they do is far worse. Your insistence on defending CS and their stolen designs with each of your posts is really getting sad. Keep it up though. It may be sad, but it is entertaining nonetheless.

 

[Dorito Monk]

I meant close, but not exact, the two I saw were different from each other also, but the blade shapes were very similar to the one he made. The handles were different in that they were thicker and straighter.

Like I stated many designs are based off other ideas and either combined and or improved on.

So, by 'similar designs', you mean you saw a couple knives with a similar blade shape? My good man, early Homo Sapiens might have knapped a piece of flint that had a vaguely similar, leaf-shaped blade. By no means would that constitute a similar design, much less an excuse for Cold Steel's blatant knockoff.

Many designs are based off of other ideas. This much is true. This particular Cold Steel design seems to be based on the idea that there's always someone willing to make a buck off of someone else's hard work.

 

[Ankerson]

Some nobody company stealing a CS design and selling it for peanuts is no big deal. Ask Spyderco. It happens all the time. CS stealing other designs and selling them for what they do is far worse. Your insistence on defending CS and their stolen designs with each of your posts is really getting sad. Keep it up though. It may be sad, but it is entertaining nonetheless.

I am not really defending CS, I don't work for them so I could care less really. I don't see any knife company pounding on my door to hand me money I can tell you that for sure.....

All that I am saying is that there are designs on the market that have been either borrowed and or improved on by a lot of companies over the past what 100+ years.

If that didn't happen at all we would have what 2 knives on the market total to use, one fixed blade and one folding knife instead of the thousands that we have to choose from today.

And it's silly to target one company when they all do it or have done it in the past.

Unless that said company or person is putting money in your pocket why should anyone really care what the companies do?

Nobody is paying me I can tell you that so what they do isn't my business....

I buy from them, there is a huge difference there, now if they were paying my bills then things would be different.

We are customers, that means we PAY THEM and support their Life Styles etc, not the other way around...

That means I am not going to lose any sleep if some other company copies something from them or the other way around, it doesn't effect me personally either way.

Brand loyalty, yes I can understand that completely, we all have our opinions on that.

 

[Picksmith]

Last time I looked knives like the Pendleton hunter or Bob Loveless black bear classic... Cold Steel paid the makers before produceing those knives, and Lynn Thompson is pals with the guys at least on a professional level. The CS canadian belt knife is a plastic handled cheapy knockoff of a knife that's over 50 years old. Would you say it's on the same level as a Grohmann? Says right on their website they are aware of 16 companies "copying" thier design, and what sets theirs apart are high quality materials and craftsmanship. I think it's safe to say they aren't concerned about getting squeezed out of the market over a 10 dollar CS knife.

Which is kinda the point. Though the M-tech is a much more similar knife to a ti-lite, and a tilite is a much more recent design being knocked off, the canadian belt knife is to a Grohmann what that M-tech is to the Tilite. Just a knock off junker by comparison.

 

[Jraptor]

You get what you pay for. If your life is only worth $3.50, go for it. Enjoy being fused into your car seat when your cheap knife fails to cut even the seatbelt that holds you into your firey doom. I buy the real deal, to reward hard work and honor.

 

[Dorito Monk]

Last time I looked knives like the Pendleton hunter or Bob Loveless black bear classic... Cold Steel paid the makers before produceing those knives, and Lynn Thompson is pals with the guys at least on a professional level. The CS canadian belt knife is a plastic handled cheapy knockoff of a knife that's over 50 years old. Would you say it's on the same level as a Grohmann? Says right on their website they are aware of 16 companies "copying" thier design, and what sets theirs apart are high quality materials and craftsmanship. I think it's safe to say they aren't concerned about getting squeezed out of the market over a 10 dollar CS knife.

You definitely make a good point about some of the knives Cold Steel has allegedly knocked-off, but with Grohmann knives, I'm not too sure it's entirely the case...

I'd definitely say that Cold Steel isn't edging into the same market as the Bob Loveless sub-hilt knives. I mean, if someone's willing to front the bill for a Bob Loveless knife, it doesn't seem likely that they're going to settle for a Cold Steel, and, by extension, I wouldn't think anyone connected to Bob Loveless would be losing money in the exchange.

Grohmann's situation is a bit different, though. To say that Grohmann need not be concerned about being squeezed out by competition from cheap Chinese knockoffs just isn't true. In fact, the Canadian government recently started buying cheap Chinese knockoffs of the Grohmann #3 Boat knife to issue to the CF instead of the made-in-Pictou blades that had been issued for many years previous.

So, you can see how their company would probably feel the damage when they start losing government contracts to competitors who are putting out cheap knockoffs of their original designs. Add to that the number of private consumers who might have bought a Cold Steel (or, for that matter, any one of the other alleged 16 companies that have copied the Grohmann design) knockoff instead of a genuine Grohmann, and surely you can see how a smaller knife company like this would start to take a major hit in their profits.

 

[jimh0220]

Can someone let me know when the CS pissing match stops? ALL knives probably have look alikes. It happens not just BY Cold Steel, but TO CS, and, I'm sure, to every major mfgr out there, many of whom ave probably copied others' styles as well.

Some of you must go into convulsions when you look at kitchen knives. Almost ALL of them look alike, including the blocks. The mere thought of your seizures at Macy's makes me laugh so hard I think I peed myself..... damn!

 

[Jraptor]

When did this thread get hijacked into a CS thread?

 

[Dorito Monk]

When did this thread get hijacked into a CS thread?

Uh, the first post?

Unless I missed something, the very first post was about a Cold Steel design being ripped off by another company. Discussing the main issue (Knockoffs) and one of the two companies (CS) mentioned in the original post doesn't sound like thread hijacking to me. Unless you had a wildly different interpretation of the OP...

 

[Toby G]

Um, this is probably the wrong place to say this, but the Mtech knife is a copy or a knock-off but it isn't a counterfeit. It would be a counterfeit if someone changed the markings and tried to pass it off as a different brand.

Its nice to know that Mtech makes cheap copies of better brands. This is good information. I suspected as much when I saw them going unsold on ebay at 99 cents with 5.95 for shipping and handling. I'm sure a lot of folks have bought them -- I call that a learning experience for them. Caveat emptor

A thread about what cheap knives could be turned into counterfeits of other more expensive knives would actually be helpful to a novice collector like me; especially if it also gave tips on how to spot them. Flame wars are counterproductive and just turn off the newbie who is trying to learn something.

 

[Picksmith]

You definitely make a good point about some of the knives Cold Steel has allegedly knocked-off, but with Grohmann knives, I'm not too sure it's entirely the case...

I'd definitely say that Cold Steel isn't edging into the same market as the Bob Loveless sub-hilt knives. I mean, if someone's willing to front the bill for a Bob Loveless knife, it doesn't seem likely that they're going to settle for a Cold Steel, and, by extension, I wouldn't think anyone connected to Bob Loveless would be losing money in the exchange.

Grohmann's situation is a bit different, though. To say that Grohmann need not be concerned about being squeezed out by competition from cheap Chinese knockoffs just isn't true. In fact, the Canadian government recently started buying cheap Chinese knockoffs of the Grohmann #3 Boat knife to issue to the CF instead of the made-in-Pictou blades that had been issued for many years previous.

So, you can see how their company would probably feel the damage when they start losing government contracts to competitors who are putting out cheap knockoffs of their original designs. Add to that the number of private consumers who might have bought a Cold Steel (or, for that matter, any one of the other alleged 16 companies that have copied the Grohmann design) knockoff instead of a genuine Grohmann, and surely you can see how a smaller knife company like this would start to take a major hit in their profits.

For government contracts the most acceptable quality they can get for the cheapest price is always gonna dictate what they buy. While I see what you're getting at, and the compound damage to their profit is real I'm sure, the CS knife is not taking their customers. It's a different level of quality altogether. Someone who buys a CS bargain bin cheapy like that belt knife was never in the market for a Grohmann in the first place. If they were they will come back around and try one of the more expensive knockoffs. For CS to give a nod to the Grohmann it would have to be of a higher build quality or they would just be dragging the name in the mud. Not that it's a bad knife, but it's not handmade. I dunno, how many knife manufactor's does Grohmann have to acknowledge are copying the pattern before their intellectual property is assimilated by the community. Like a buck knife or victorinox... and there are tons of copy cat cheapies of those. Doesn't change the fact if you want a nicer one, a flea market bargain blade isn't gonna cut it.

 

[Ankerson]

You definitely make a good point about some of the knives Cold Steel has allegedly knocked-off, but with Grohmann knives, I'm not too sure it's entirely the case...

I'd definitely say that Cold Steel isn't edging into the same market as the Bob Loveless sub-hilt knives. I mean, if someone's willing to front the bill for a Bob Loveless knife, it doesn't seem likely that they're going to settle for a Cold Steel, and, by extension, I wouldn't think anyone connected to Bob Loveless would be losing money in the exchange.

Grohmann's situation is a bit different, though. To say that Grohmann need not be concerned about being squeezed out by competition from cheap Chinese knockoffs just isn't true. In fact, the Canadian government recently started buying cheap Chinese knockoffs of the Grohmann #3 Boat knife to issue to the CF instead of the made-in-Pictou blades that had been issued for many years previous.

So, you can see how their company would probably feel the damage when they start losing government contracts to competitors who are putting out cheap knockoffs of their original designs. Add to that the number of private consumers who might have bought a Cold Steel (or, for that matter, any one of the other alleged 16 companies that have copied the Grohmann design) knockoff instead of a genuine Grohmann, and surely you can see how a smaller knife company like this would start to take a major hit in their profits.

I see your point and it happens all the time...... It doesn't make it right, but it still happens.

Personally I always buy the originals to support the company, but then I don't ever buy junk either so I wouldn't buy knockoffs in the 1st place.

For everyone like me there are another 100 that will buy the cheapest they possibly can thinking they are getting a deal. I can't even count how many posts I have seen over the years about some knife that someone paid $10 for. The people who buy this cheap junk will never spend the money on the originals in the 1st place so the company can't be losing something they never would have had to begin with.

Some people think $20 or $50 is a lot of money to spend on a knife so there is no way they will ever spend $100 let alone say $300 or more on one. Those are the ones who make money for the knockoff companies, they are cheap anyway.

I go to the flea market a few times a year and see people buying the heck out of the knockoffs, those people will never change.

You know the type, they won't spend the $30 on a Buck 110 when they can buy a knife just as good (In their mind) for $5 at the flea market and nothing you can say will ever change their minds and the worst thing is they will think that knife is just as good as that $300 you have in your pocket. They will tell you that you got ripped off for paying too much or they won't buy a Buck because they would just be paying for the name.

 

[jimh0220]

I have yet to weigh in on Cold Steel as a brand, but here I go:

They make a ton of different knives. Many emulate, or copy if you will, other knives. If the designs they use were infringing on the patented desighs of others, I would think they would be sued, as I'm sure they have plenty of dough for the taking.

They also, however, make many items of their own design, many of which are made extremely well. Their lesser priced designs, they openly admit that they are not the same quality as their higher end models.

I've used a fair amount of the low to moderately priced models, and all seem to be as well made as described. I would gladly, if I could afford them, buy the highest priced models, as I'm sure they would hold up equaaly well as should be expected for the $$.

I can say the same for many other brands, some I like, others I dont.

If you don't like CS, but cannot give SPECIFIC examples of their poor quality, then it would appear you might just not care for the brand, which is cool. Otherwise, haters, how about real reasons that have facts why the company is so bad. If you havn't got 'em, then cop to the fact it's just your personal preference, not fact.

 

[jimh0220]

BTW, the M Tech I bought was, in fact, nicer looking than the Ti Lite Zytel, but the quality did suck. But I've seen much worse. Amazingly still available, so I suspect that CS couldn't give a poop about it, or I suspect it would be off the market.

 

[Dorito Monk]

I've made it a point in the past to make my opinion of knock-offs or copied designs pretty clear. I'm personally not a fan of companies reproducing or otherwise using someone else's designs, but I don't think less of any individual for buying said reproductions or knockoffs, if you will. Given which side of the argument I came down on in this thread, it might surprise folks to know that I'm absolutely in favour of people spending their money wherever they choose, whether it's to purchase a thousand-dollar custom, a cheap gas station blade, or even a blatant knock-off of another design.

What I took issue with in this thread were the assertions of some users that a company, Cold Steel in this case, was totally innocent of producing carbon-copies of other makers' designs. Whether you folks feel Cold Steel was in the right or not for producing knives that copied other makers' designs, past or present, I find it very hard to deny that it did, in fact, take place.

As for the broader implications and the morality of it all: like The Dude says, "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." :thumbup:

 

[Cynic2701]

Ugh, I'm going to sound like a pretentious a**hole...but here goes.

The Hegelian Dialectic. Michel Foucault and Discourse Analysis (specifically Discipline and Punish). Kant's The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Derrida's Of Grammatology.

In synthesizing the ideas of these philosophers, and from statements made by them outside of these works, I would argue that in fact there exists no current thought or knowledge that was not made possible - and therefore must be grounded in - previous knowledge. Epistemic violence and discourse forcings have shaped what we know, and how we think. Knife design, whether contemporary or traditional, is epistemically based on posteriori knowledge: it is therefore an intrinsically derivative and impure knowledge system.

As has been made clear by statements in this thread, there are varying opinions. Many of you are attempting to persuade another to conform to your own discourse. Here, epistemic violence and hegemonic discourse are visible in each and every opinion stated.

Yet, if such discourse is ultimately grounded posteriori rather than a priori, then any such argument based on such a ground is made subjectively rather than objectively. Though intersubjective verifiability may make this discussion possible, I'm not convinced that arguing through it is a valid means for grounding knife design discourse.

Why then the fervor over this discussion?

As most here are self-professed knife knuts, it is difficult to imagine that the arguments made here are waging epistemic violence on non-knife people. Instead, there seems to be here some contention over the noesis of the phenomenon of knife design.

 

[A.P.F.]

Ugh, I'm going to sound like a pretentious a**hole...but here goes.

The Hegelian Dialectic. Michel Foucault and Discourse Analysis (specifically Discipline and Punish). Kant's The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Derrida's Of Grammatology.

In synthesizing the ideas of these philosophers, and from statements made by them outside of these works, I would argue that in fact there exists no current thought or knowledge that was not made possible - and therefore must be grounded in - previous knowledge. Epistemic violence and discourse forcings have shaped what we know, and how we think. Knife design, whether contemporary or traditional, is epistemically based on posteriori knowledge: it is therefore an intrinsically derivative and impure knowledge system.

As has been made clear by statements in this thread, there are varying opinions. Many of you are attempting to persuade another to conform to your own discourse. Here, epistemic violence and hegemonic discourse are visible in each and every opinion stated.

Yet, if such discourse is ultimately grounded posteriori rather than a priori, then any such argument based on such a ground is made subjectively rather than objectively. Though intersubjective verifiability may make this discussion possible, I'm not convinced that arguing through it is a valid means for grounding knife design discourse.

Why then the fervor over this discussion?

As most here are self-professed knife knuts, it is difficult to imagine that the arguments made here are waging epistemic violence on non-knife people. Instead, there seems to be here some contention over the noesis of the phenomenon of knife design.

I don't think you are pretentious, Cynic.

I remember some writing in a toilet cubicle when I was in University some 40 years ago. There was an arrow pointing to the roll of paper, with the caption, 'Philosophy Degrees - Take One'. Anyway, I digress.

Your argument is well reasoned and correct as far as I am concerned. Now, if you would translate it for the masses, it would be well-nigh perfect.