The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
I agree with you. However, it's not always entirely clear from photos exactly what you're getting, and getting it in hand may reveal desired changes, or sometimes preferences change.
I sold a knife to a gentleman which he decided to make a modification to the handle by grinding a divot into. He didn't ask me first. Where he put the divot could have been problematic on some of my knives to to a practice I have sometime shad of creating a hollow on the inside of the scales for weight reduction. When I saw the pic he sent me, I told him I wish he'd mentioned to me first that he wanted to do that, so I could have warned him of potential pitfalls (his grind was not sufficient to expose a hollow fortunately but that wasn't the point). He had every right to make the changes, but I still think prudence and courtesy would have been better exercised by reaching out to me first.
On more than one occasion I have been asked by knife owners to make modifications to their kitchen knives, which they received from the original maker with a recurve in the blade that prevented heel to tip cutting board contact. In one case the knife was made by a hobbyist and (IIRC) given to the customer as a gift, and in another case it was made (to my great surprise) by a maker who has been well known since before I was even doing this for a living. In neither case did I feel the need to reach out to the original maker. The knives were owned by the respective customers, who had every right to seek correction.
The customer in the second case also asked my advice on whether he should complain to the maker, or make a post in the GB&U. I said that the maker in question should be the one to fix the issue, and cover the cost of shipping, but the customer did not want to have the maker fix it. I can't remember if it was a once bitten, twice shy thing, or overseas shipping, or both, but it doesn't matter, that was his decision and he had the right to make it. I took the job, and insisted that he at least reach out to the maker, and let him know the issue with the blade, and that he has decided to have another maker regrind it. I also suggested that he do so amicably, and keep it from becoming a public situation, unless the maker's reply would somehow warrant a public response. To my knowledge the issue never went public, and since then I have seen many blades made by the maker in question posted on the forum, all of which which looked perfect.
I don't know enough about your work to know what makers designs you may or may not have made similar versions of.
Fair enough. Hopefully none that cross the line. I find it interesting that we have on the one hand makers who will publish what could be their entire design catalogue to the public domain, like Dan Comeau or Bob Engnath, and then makers who vehemently protest that their designs are strictly copyrighted like Jay Fisher. I'd suspect that most makers have ideas that sit between these two extremes of "design possessiveness" for lack of a better work.
Iz Turley basically told me (paraphrased due to my spotty memory) that the closest thing to an original design you can get is to cohesively mash together a bunch of stuff you think is cool.
From what I have read, Tony Bose allowed anyone, even encouraged them, to use his designs.

We all have to think we are bringing into being things that are in some way superior to what is attainable