Blatent attempt to steal IP

[akaAK]

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/sh ... s-tomahawk

Just wanted to put this up for Spyderco, wouldn't appear to be something available but you can see the company post (#15) indicating a prelim price. Just surprised at how blatent this is. Looks like the have no problem stealing any IP and the company does use Chinese manufacturers to produce products for the Canadian market historically.

[akaAK]

Should probably be in the Counterfeit section which is where I thought I had put it.

[bearfacedkiller]

The dialog in that thread is terrible. The company specifically asked them what designs they want copied. Another Ganzo. The race to the bottom continues, yeah!

[zhyla]

I didn't read the whole thread but it just looks like one of those threads where everybody says what they want their favorite manufacturer to make. Spyderco's site doesn't list any patents. So before you start throwing around terms like "steal IP" you might want to make sure IP exists in the first place. Just because someone cranks out a tomahawk that is roughly the same shape as Spyderco's doesn't mean they've done anything illegal.

I can see a lot of similarities between these two hawks (the butt end, the curved handle) and I'm sure nobody would accuse Spyderco of ripping off ZT. You could imagine the above mentioned Chinese manufacturer coming up with something equally similar/different as these two are.

[bearfacedkiller]

I see your point. I would argue that intent is the key point here. The OP is asking for a knockoff and then the company uses the words copy. He is openly admitting that he is not coming up with a similar design but rather that he is copying a design. He also then later asks is anybody has any other designs they want copied. Two different people coming up with similar designs is ethically different than openly admitting that you are willing to copy whatever designs your customers want. As long as people want cheap knockoffs somebody out there is gonna make them.

A quote. His words, not mine.
"sure, let us know what design to copy, and if there are any improvements wanted."

[akaAK]

Hey Zhyla, I can accept my use of the term IP may not be 100% accurate but its hard to comment on something that hasn't been made yet. I could imagine the Chinese manufacturer of coming up with something different but that wasn't the point of the thread that I posted. Also I doubt Spyderco is going to proceed based on my comments here (use of the term IP) so my intention of alerting Spyderco to what seems on the surface to be unethical behaviour in relation to one of their designs so they can decide what they would like to do is the purpose of my post.That being said (like Darby pointed out) the thread has the dealer asking what products his customers want copied (not similar or like or in the same vein as) but straight up copied. The dealer then qoutes a rough price estimate.

If they produce a direct copy is that a problem?

[zhyla]

A direct copy? I'm not a lawyer and know very little about trademark infringement. But copying things isn't automatically legally actionable. As Spyderco fans we may not like this but IP is not the same as real property and it doesn't work like you might want it to.

It may not be obvious to people who don't design things but often new things start as an improvement to something that exists. I don't really like knockoffs for the most part but if they actually improve on the original and it's visually distinct more power to them.

[sal]

"There are more horses asses than there are horses".

"It takes all kinds of animals to make a forest and without the leeches and mosquitoes, one might not appreciate the hawk and the deer".

"**** does not happen, it always comes from an a$$hole".

sal

[The Mastiff]

:)

Joe

[Larry_Mott]

Not that i would have been likely to order anything from canadian ammo anyway, but now they're *definetly* on my sh*t list..
Selling $10 clones of my native Mora, and to top it off "tell us what to copy"

[Trevitrace]

I didn't read the whole thread but it just looks like one of those threads where everybody says what they want their favorite manufacturer to make. Spyderco's site doesn't list any patents. So before you start throwing around terms like "steal IP" you might want to make sure IP exists in the first place. Just because someone cranks out a tomahawk that is roughly the same shape as Spyderco's doesn't mean they've done anything illegal.

I can see a lot of similarities between these two hawks (the butt end, the curved handle) and I'm sure nobody would accuse Spyderco of ripping off ZT. You could imagine the above mentioned Chinese manufacturer coming up with something equally similar/different as these two are.

By "a lot of similarities" I was expecting more than one considering the handle shapes aren't that similar.




Sal, as always and yet again, your patience with these topics is remarkable. Thank you.

[akaAK]

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/sh ... awk/page19

So what do you all think, close enough or not close at all? You can guess my opinion.

[tvenuto]

Ha, yea it's a knockoff with hex holes at the top instead of the spydie hole.

[BTG]

Got this one a few years ago, it's from an Australian company, Hardcore Hardware....it was before Spyderco made an axe..also made with D2 and G10....but always thought strange , the hole doesn't really serve any purpose, making it bigger would have saved more weight if that was the idea.

[zhyla]

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/sh ... awk/page19

So what do you all think, close enough or not close at all? You can guess my opinion.

Pretty dang close. Clever use of hex holes instead of trademark-shaped round holes.

[ArmaliteKnight]

I think my biggest, most upsetting concern is that the original post was directly asking for a copy of a Spyderco product.
Not just because I'm a spyderco fanboy-I also feel for Gerber and other companies out there that these people are asking for direct product infringement. I get it might not be the same steel, finish, etc. but something just seems morally wrong about it.
I guess money and profit leave little room for morals though.

[Cor]

Hi,

I am a landscape architect by profession so I like to think I understand a little of the design process. I'm really impressed by how Sal and co handle these kind of things. A large part of why I like Spyderco so much and intend to be a life long customer is their approach to design and collaboration with other designers. In interviews I've seen they are always very respectful of collaborations and make a point of honouring and referencing other designers.

This is also why I don't mind spending extra money on their products (including extra shipping etc). It's not only about material and labour costs involved... Designers need to be subsidised through sales and designing something is difficult. You tend to leave a bit of yourself in the product thinking about it at all hours. You also open yourself up to scrutiny,which is not fun after you gave a little (or a lot) of yourself to a project...

Theres a big difference between looking at precedent and building on inspiration or lessons learned from something someone else did and acknowledging them. I think most designs follow from another project in some ways or other. However for that to happen, someone somewhere first had to spend time and money to develop it. So good or bad, designers play a massive role in moving a product (knives in this case) forward. Even a "bad design" is an option explored and a lesson learned.

I don't think one can really stop people "copying" your work so I think the way it is handled is very good. For me as a customer though, I will never support a company I think copies more than designs.. I feel like the little I spend on Spyderco knives, I help support a company that is friendly and helpful but also push the design aspect of knives. So I am indirectly in a very small minute way helping to fund the design of knives we will be using in the future.

Perhaps I am over thinking this but as someone who works in a design industry, I feel very passionate about it. (and sorry for the rant).

Cor

[bearfacedkiller]

I guess bottom feeders need to eat too. Unfortunately, it is what it is. You just need to work around certain types of people in this world.

That is me putting it nicely.

[mb1]

I read through that linked thread last night. Only one person questioned the ethics of what was being done, and many pages and posts later only one response was given: something to the effect of "duh, that's what this company does and it's why we're here." No one seemed to bat an eye because of the assumed objective.

So their ethical standard is making money selling affordable knockoffs by violating copyrights or IP is OK. Hmm. What do you do with that?

Guess you can take legal action if the cost trade says it's worth it. From Sal's quotes above, it sounds like some of these aren't worth the time.

I will add, you reap what you sew. Things tend to come around and bite you later when you take shortcuts or screw people.