Any offical word from Spyderco?!?!?!?!?!

[steve andrews]

To me, that's the equivalent of saying you would willingly and knowingly accept stolen money as a donation "because it was for a good cause". Personally, I find that reprehensible.

Oooooookay, thanks for that. Really nice of you Paul. :)

As things are starting to get personal I'm going to call it a day.


I own and enjoy knives by both companies.

The Vex matter will be settled by legal action. I don't see that keen knife collectors have anything to benefit by squabbling over the issue. It is, after all, out of our hands.

[Trihonda]

Quote by The Deacon
Fact: The round hole opening hasn't been used as the opening device on every FOLDING knife :rolleyes:

Yes, Steve, not EVERY FOLDING KNIFE. But, if I'm not mistaken, The Deacon revealed that on page two of this thread.

And in actuality, he revealed this fact in in the SAME SENTENCE quoted by Steve Andrews! However, this was edited out of Steve's "quoting". I don't care much about this pissing match, though I'm enjoying the thread. However, I'm just pointing out that most people don't like quotes taken out of context. It's pretty easy to put words in someone's mouth (or misrepresent), by selective editing. Rant off. :)

Quote:

Fact: The round hole opening device has been used as the opening device on every FOLDING knife except one that has been marketed under the Spyderco label from their first, the C01 Worker to their latest the C113 Caly 3. The sole exception was the C27 Jess Horn. Fixed blades such as the Ronin do not require opening, so they do not need the round hole opener.

[steve andrews]

Trihonda,
If you take the time to read my post properly (it's #48), you will see that I did not edit anything out of my quoting of The Deacon's first "fact". I only highlighted three of the words.

I then stated my own "fact".

Anyhow, I refer you to my previous post.

[Fred Sanford]

... I don't see that keen knife collectors have anything to benefit by squabbling over the issue. It is, after all, out of our hands.

Well, I am not about squabbling over the issue. I am about sticking with the company that is the most sincere and honest about stuff. Spyderco has integrity.

I used to be a huge Benchmade fan. Hearing the story about Al Mar, and seeing the Benchmade Skirmish, and now the Vex, and on top of that the issue between Benchmade and New Graham Knives, I've lost all respect for Benchmade. In fact, I just sold my last BM 520, and also my 550 Griptilian. I have one Benchmade left. A 555 Mini-Griptilian. I will probably sell that one here soon also.

Like I said before, this hits home with me due to the 2 patents that my father has and he was majorly screwed over on one.

Benchmade no longer has a place in my pocket.

If it turns out that BM actually licensed the hole for the Vex, I will still not buy them due to all the other stuff that I mentioned above. Les treated Mike Dye from New Graham like total crap in front of a bunch of people. I can't remember if it was SHOT show or Blade show just a few months back.

[Rogcohen]

Just to satisfy my curiosity, could someone PM me the Al Mar/Benchmade story??

Thanks
Roger

[bh49]

Just to satisfy my curiosity, could someone PM me the Al Mar/Benchmade story??

Thanks
Roger

I will apriciate this as well
Thanks

[jestyr]

i admit my interest is piqued as well. if someone could IM me the story as well, please.

[Fred Sanford]

Just PM Zac if you want to know the story.

[tomso]

:spyder: Round Hole :spyder: is a trademark (said in previous posts) and as that can not be used by other companies. The nearest example, being on totally different subject would be Wayne Rooney who's name is now a trademark and therefore http://www.waynerooney.com has to be given to him in ten days. Being a name or some other distinctive shape or logo, if it's a trademark, you can't use it. That is how I see it. The lack of official statement by Spyderco is an indication that the matter isn't taken lightly or someone (Tazkristi) would said something at the get go. Like relax folks, they have our permission. Interesting thread.

[The Deacon]

I don't see that keen knife collectors have anything to benefit by squabbling over the issue. It is, after all, out of our hands.

Well Steve, that's where we disagree. I would suggest your statement is an attempt to assuage your conscience. WE are the ones who, by the choices we make as to where to spend our money either show our support for companies that wantonly disregard the theives or for companies with a sense of honor.

[steve andrews]

Well Steve, that's where we disagree. I would suggest your statement is an attempt to assuage your conscience.

No Paul, my conscience is clear. Don't forget - I'm immoral.

[yablanowitz]

I might as well chunk in my two cents as well. There are very few facts involved here.
FACT #1. The round opening hole is a registered trademark od Spyderco. Period. Full stop. Wether it should be or not is irrelavent. Even if the Supreme Court rules tomorrow that it should not have been allowed, the fact is, today the hole is a registered trademark.
FACT #2. Benchmade has announced a new knife which uses a round opening hole, WITHOUT CREDITING SPYDERCO OR AKNOWLEDGING THEIR TRADEMARK. Period . Full stop. Even if they did it solely to initiate a court test of the validity of the trademark, the fact is, they have violated the trademark law.
Benchmade's action reminds me of the worst kind of schoolyard bully. The kind that taunts their victim until said victim punches them just to shut them up, then runs screaming and crying to an adult, only to laugh while their victim is punished by someone else. Benchmade thinks they have a win/win situation here. They either get to cash in on Spyderco's success while weakening the brand recognition, or the get the company to spend a lot of money defending their trademark in court. The only way they can lose is if their sales drop too low to stay in business.
I for one, will not support a company which would employ such tactics.

[markg]

I thought maybe the Spyder hole falls under designs law? Trademarks are usually words or logos, though I believe rarely they can be 3D designs.

The "shape" of a Coke bottle is a trademark... So I guess it can be...

[Fairlane]

I will apriciate this as well
Thanks

And if any of you find the time... I would like to read that as well :D

[Mr Blonde]

[quote="zenheretic"]I would like to take a moment to welcome our newest members to the Spyderco forum. It must be a harsh transition from their more familiar Benchmade forums. ]


LOL! You sir, are a baaaaad stand-up comic! :D

Wouter

[The Deacon]

The "shape" of a Coke bottle is a trademark... So I guess it can be...

Exactly. The "arrow" shaped clip on a Parker pen is a particularly good example of a trademark that, while functional, does not have a functional advantage over clips of all other shapes.

[ghostrider]

[quote="Mr Blonde"]LOL! You sir, are a baaaaad stand-up comic! ]
That may well be true, but sometimes he comes up with some good ones. :D

[STR]

I don't understand this fuss about something that has a registered trademark number assigned to it. Just because an individual or a company as a whole may feel it is not legit or that its a cover for and expired patent is not a valid reasoning.

Do these same people run stop signs just because they disagree with it being there? Do you shoot guns out the window of your car when hunting just because you think the law is not valid? Maybe you are one of those that tells an officer of the law that stops you that you don't recognize his authority because he is not an elected official.? Sounds like vigilante justice going on here if thats the case. We should be outraged at such things and I believe most moral folks are.

We have a country governed by law. The law is the law. Its not open for discussion by laymen once set by those in power. Even if the decision about the trademark was reversed it wouldn't matter in this case because all the facts of this case would have taken place before the revision. Opinion, ignorance and feelings one way or the other are no excuse for breaking the law. Tell it to a judge and see how far it gets you.

STR

[Mr Blonde]

I think another reason that we won't be seeing an 'official' response soon, is that I think Spyderco doesn't want to see an interforum feud. Even if they gave us the info in the most objective manner possible, it would no doubt fuel a fire, even among us. We do love our brand and we'll defend it when it is 'wronged', especially when the Spydercrew officially admits that it was wronged.

If I were the PR guy on this one, I think I'd only make a statement like "we're talking to see if we can come to an agreement. Thank you for your support but we'd hate to see anyone badmouthing another company (I'm not sure that has happened yet though). Remember, (and I have seen this mentioned before) we're all good...just different" :D

Wouter

[rcbalt2]

I think another reason that we won't be seeing an 'official' response soon, is that I think Spyderco doesn't want to see an interforum feud. Even if they gave us the info in the most objective manner possible, it would no doubt fuel a fire, even among us. We do love our brand and we'll defend it when it is 'wronged', especially when the Spydercrew officially admits that it was wronged.

If I were the PR guy on this one, I think I'd only make a statement like "we're talking to see if we can come to an agreement. Thank you for your support but we'd hate to see anyone badmouthing another company (I'm not sure that has happened yet though). Remember, (and I have seen this mentioned before) we're all good...just different" :D

Wouter

I was thinking the same thing. The vex looks like a decent knife but its to blatent of a rip off for me to feel ok owning one.