Cheap and cheerful???

[Seamaster]

Well said, Grant.

Jekostas, I was a bit vague on the "Chinese Way" for a reason, muddy waters so to say. A discussion about this won't lead to anything positive. I'm all for "Made in China" as long as there is a level playingfield. Grant slightly alluded to what is involved in going after such practices, so let's leave it at that.

While I agree that Peter Atwood won't loose any money on this, it is all too obvious that his intellectual properties have been appropriated. He surely is not the inventor of the pocket tool (a search in google books will turn up adverts for such tools in Popular Mechanics etc. from a hundred years ago), but this surely is a copy of his G3. Not even one attempt to improve his design.

As to this garnering him additional customers, I'm not so sure. The two markets are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. A potential buyer of this copy wouldn't even know who the originator is.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Maybe not initially, but if they like it enough to research it or lose it and try to go online to replace it many of them will read sites like this one and learn the truth.

Def

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

[Farmman]

Having looked at the two pictures the cheap tool is not an exact copy as the cut outs on top and bottom are different. Minimal change from the Atwood which I am sure was the design brief but still a change. As for it being a fake it is clearly branded differently to an Atwood so that accusation does not hold up either. Manufacturing has borrowed each others ideas since time began (soft drinks spring to mind) with small changes applied. The other example I keep coming to would be hex bits. Someone somewhere came up with the idea however there are lots of companies out there producing hex bits in there own name now which to me all look the same.
True I would not like some one stealing my invention.  However it does go on everywhere as described above and in the other posts above. I for one had more than my fair share of cheap leatherman knockoffs before getting the real thing. Yes they where naff and broke quickly, but without that frustration I would never have finally taken the plunge to get a proper leatherman.

Anyway can we please get back to showing the pictures of tools which keeps us all entertained?

[shecky]

I agree that patents are probably worthless to someone like Atwood, as they tend to be to any small time inventor. The interesting thing here is that Atwood's success does not depend on his inventions or his "intellectual property". It depends on his business acumen and luck. Both of which he seems to have. He basically sells man-baubles for premium prices, and has carved out an enviable niche for himself. This is far more security than any claim on intellectual property can bestow.

[MeadMaker]

The discussion about  buying or not buying knock-offs will rage endlessly because that is the type of topic it is.  Many have very strong beliefs on either side of the discussion and nobody is likely to change their minds.

But the original complaint in this thread was not about the buying of knock-offs.  It was about supporting the buying of knock-offs.

kirk 13 started the thread with a picture and comments about a tool he purchased on Ebay. Some other members observed that it looked like a direct copy of an Atwood design.

Gadget Guy complained "It makes me sick that you guys support a direct copy! Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed."  No problem so far, but that statement left me a bit confused.  Was Gadget Guy sickened by the members or the mods?

Grant replies saying "Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed"  Seems right.  This is a forum for discussion, not an for enforcing one member's beliefs over another's. 

Gadget Guy responds with "No drama here... I do not agree with supporting fakes, so I will not support a forum that does. Please delete my account when you get a chance."  Now I am confused.  Is he saying that, by allowing a discussion about a knock-off, that Grant and MTO support kock-offs?  That is a bit of a stretch.  This forum has covered many topics including other discussions about copies, but I don't remember Grant or any other admin. supporting or recommending the design, manufacture or sale of knock-offs.

Gadget Guy may have quit over the apparent support of copies by other members of MTO.  That doesn't make sense though.  There seems to be just as many members who not only don't support the purchase of knock-offs, they are offended by it. In fact, that is a very good reason to let the discussion continue. Let the members on both sides of an issue present their views.

I don't agree with some of what is written in this forum, but that doesn't stop me from reading the posts here, in fact it is one of the things that helps keep things interesting.

Threeme2189 made an interesting observation.  We've talked about plenty of knock-offs and cheap alternatives before without any ill effects."

 If we can discuss copies of other items without such outrage, why should a discussion about an Atwood knock-off be any different?

Its too bad that a member was offended enough to quit.  Hopefully after some time away his curiosity will tempt him to come back and see what is going on here.

[Grant Lamontagne]

In John's defense, as he stated, he is very passionate about the works of small makers like Peter Atwood.  Because of this he tends to be somewhat overprotective, and if I may, somewhat hot blooded when the discussion comes up.  This is not meant to insult him in the slightest- in fact, I wish to heck I could create a product that inspired people to get behind it like that.

The down side is that John (using him as an example though the same thing can happen to most of us), can be offended by things, that when analyzed later on by a cooler head, seem quite different from what was initially read into it.  At the time, he likely saw our support of a discussion about a blatant attempt to rip off a friend of his as support for a thief, which I'm sure all of us would react similarly if we were in his position.  No one likes to sit idly by and watch their friend get ripped off. 

As time goes by and we examine the details without holding a grudge we can see that it is in fact just a harmless, yet interesting discussion over something that exists within our range of topics.  I hope that when John cools down and checks this thread out that he will decide to come back to us, but that is up to him, and as I said, there are no hard feelings.

This leads me into the speech I've made so often before, and yet hate having to make again.  The short version is that a forum becomes very boring when everyone thinks the same way about everything.  When folks are not allowed to have differences of opinions it is no longer a forum, it's an "againstum."

Def

[Seamaster]

Let's put an end to this. Someone already buy one of these suckers. Use it hard. Put it away wet. Write a honest review here on MTO. That's the way it's done here. I've got my doubts regarding steel choice, heat treat, wrench sizes, thickness etc. Anyone who compromises the design process also compromises production.

I'm not buying. I'm invested in the real thing from the golden years (2002 to roughly 2007) with special requests and no egos involved. Today, there are competitors with original ideas that are worth a look. Thinking of it, I should probably unload the stuff before the Atwood bubble bursts.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Anyone here got the "real" version willing to do a head to head?  If so, I'll buy the tool and have it shipped to them for a comparison, then send it on to me and I'll give it a long term torture test and report back.

Anyone willing to help out, send me a PM.

Def

[theonew]

Frankly, I'm actually a little surprised that Mr. Atwood doesn't have any design patents on some of his more popular models (I did a search on the USPTO and found nothing). A design patent, while offering only modest protection, they can be designed around, would allow him to at least curtail cookie cutter knock-offs. A design patent is not very expensive to get and enforce compared to a utility patent. If he ever wanted to sell his company in the future those patents could prove to be quite valuable and dramatically up the purchase price.

[Seamaster]

Well, artists can't be bothered with bureaucratic stuff.

[Mr. Whippy]

Anyone here got the "real" version willing to do a head to head?  If so, I'll buy the tool and have it shipped to them for a comparison, then send it on to me and I'll give it a long term torture test and report back.

Anyone willing to help out, send me a PM.

Def

I'll do it. I'll compare the knockoff to a couple different Atwood Prybaby versions.

Send me the knock off and I'll see what breaks when.

[AHB]

I'll do it. I'll compare the knockoff to a couple different Atwood Prybaby versions.

Send me the knock off and I'll see what breaks when.

Nate's just the right man for the job imo..   

 

[Gadget Guy]

After reading the comments off-line I felt that I needed to respond here. First off, you guys are side stepping the facts about stealing. The fact that you cant afford an Atwood in not a valid reason to buy a fake. I guess we simply live in a world with thieves and crooks who can justify anything they want to steal. That's what you guys are doing when you buy fakes! 

I'm not here to change your guys minds but simply state my opinion. The way that Grant talks about Peter is really frustrating. Grant, if Peter were to pay you would your view change? That is surely how you makes things sound buddy. Oh buy the way, makes sense that you would have this view since you can hock the fakes over at EDCSource.

I used to be Peter's top five customer. He would make custom pieces for me and basically make anything I asked of him. He got to the point where he was simply too busy to do that for any of his customers and that was hard for everyone, especially me. I don't cry about it though.     Peter has been good to me and is a really great guy, but he cant please everyone. Peter is an artist first and a tool maker second. By the way, he does indeed have a patent on the original Prybaby.

This thread isn't really about Peter though. Its about what is right and what is wrong. I get super pissed off (yes, boiling mad) when it comes to people stealing other makers ideas. You guys are right when you say that Peter didn't invent the pocket tool, but when his version on the pocket tool is ripped off it is wrong plain and simple. Make any excuse you want, give any reason you want, but buy any knock-off tool and you're stealing. Same as walking into a store and taking a piece of candy. If that's okay with you then please admit here that you dont mind being a thief.

I'm not sure where I go from here. I'm really upset about all of this and even after a good night's sleep I really dont know if I can support a forum who condones stealing. Will leaving here be a loss for me? Yes it will because I love talking about tools and I have a great love for alox SAK's...

I'll just have to keep a close eye on this thread and see where it goes.

[theonew]

By the way, he does indeed have a patent on the original Prybaby.

You wouldn't happen to know the number, I'd like to look it up.

My best friend is a patent attorney, maybe he could work out a contingency deal with Peter to go after some knock offs.

[Gadget Guy]

By the way, he does indeed have a patent on the original Prybaby.

You wouldn't happen to know the number, I'd like to look it up.

My best friend is a patent attorney, maybe he could work out a contingency deal with Peter to go after some knock offs.

I'm not going to bother Peter with any of this. He has washed his hands of this forum cr*p years ago. I do appreciate you offer of help though.