Victorinox Tang Stamps

[ulli]

The other side stampes are for the 84 mm the "voc1" and for the 91 mm the "vss5"

[jnoxyd]

The other side stampes are for the 84 mm the "voc1" and for the 91 mm the "vss5"

Thank you. Can you show pictures please, just interesting to compare this vss5 and another one (vss2?) with blank other side  I have on 91mm from early 1950s.
And can you tell us what stamp is on 91mm can opener, upp or pat1?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ulli]

Here 2 more pictures.

[jnoxyd]

Here 2 more pictures.

Thank you very much, nice knives! 84mm has pre 1951 tools but already Phillips on the back and 91mm looks like post 1952 knife but with older scales. Both looks early 1950s for me.
BTW did they used US PAT PEN stamp together +Pat since 1951?

[ulli]

Thank you very much, nice knives! 84mm has pre 1951 tools but already Phillips on the back and 91mm looks like post 1952 knife but with older scales. Both looks early 1950s for me.
BTW did they used US PAT PEN stamp together +Pat since 1951?

You mean the same time period? I think the US PAT PEND was only used a short time for the US market only. The + PAT was used for all other markets.

[jnoxyd]

Ok, thank you.

[xfile]

Wow, great! Will this AS3  stamps have a hidden rivet version after 1957?

[ulli]

Wow, great! Will this AS3  stamps have a hidden rivet version after 1957?

Yes I think so. I have (or have seen) later knives with that stamp. I m not absolutely sure, but I think I have seen that stamp also on other knives, 75 mm or slim 84 mm.

[MiniChamp]

You mean the same time period? I think the US PAT PEND was only used a short time for the US market only. The + PAT was used for all other markets.

I find it hard to believe that they used +PAT at any time before the patent was actually granted (this was on February 28, 1953), because I think that this would have been illegal (pretty much anywhere). I attach the relevant patent document.

[xfile]

Yes I think so. I have (or have seen) later knives with that stamp. I m not absolutely sure, but I think I have seen that stamp also on other knives, 75 mm or slim 84 mm.

Thank you,this kind of stamps  is really rare.

[xfile]

I find it hard to believe that they used +PAT at any time before the patent was actually granted (this was on February 28, 1953), because I think that this would have been illegal (pretty much anywhere). I attach the relevant patent document.

This is very interesting! As we usually knew before, the +PAT started in 1951，ten year patent period ending in 1971？

[kamakiri]

This is very interesting! As we usually knew before, the +PAT started in 1951，ten year patent period ending in 1971？

This is why it would be nice to change the chart. It is my belief that +PAT does not exist until 1953 for all markets.

The 'progression' of machining of the tool and that of all the early, US.PAT.PEND through large +PAT seems pretty clear to me that the two did not overlap at all.

We have covered both of these topics in the previous threads and I think in the vintage thread.

[xfile]

This is why it would be nice to change the chart. It is my belief that +PAT does not exist until 1953 for all markets.

The 'progression' of machining of the tool and that of all the early, US.PAT.PEND through large +PAT seems pretty clear to me that the two did not overlap at all.

We have covered both of these topics in the previous threads and I think in the vintage thread.

Us.pat.pen existed in 1951-1953，large + pat in 1953-1957, small + pat in 1957-1971，Is its approximate timeline understood in this way?

[kamakiri]

Us.pat.pen existed in 1951-1953，large + pat in 1953-1957, small + pat in 1957-1971，Is its approximate timeline understood in this way?

Not by everyone, it seems.

[ulli]

I find it hard to believe that they used +PAT at any time before the patent was actually granted (this was on February 28, 1953), because I think that this would have been illegal (pretty much anywhere). I attach the relevant patent document.

All I see and all I know, that argumentation - for me - makes no sense at all. On the site of the IGE you find it: "Eine Marke ist vom Anmeldedatum an für jeweils zehn Jahre geschützt. Der Schutz kann beliebig oft um weitere zehn Jahre verlängert werden." That means the patent is valid since the date of the submission. That makes sense. Because everybody can submit a patent. You don`t have to prove anything, and also the IGE does not prove if you are right (new design, new function,...). Thats up to you, up to the person or company, that makes the submit. If you as a private person or as a company think, that someone uses your own patent, that its up to you or them to make an accusation and you have to prove that you are right. So the patent startet in 1951, and victorinox extended it in 1961 for another 10 years. In 1971, the patent protection ended. Thats how it works in switzerland.
Maybe in the US its different, also in other countries. I don`t know how it goes there, but it seems that as long as a patent is not official registered, you had to use that "pat. pend." stamp, and after the registration, they changed to the +pat. And all the evidence I see leads exactly to that direction: very few knives with the pat pend stamp, most (if not all) of them you find in the US and not in europe, and most of them with the philipps.

In your argumentation, it should have startet in 1953 and ended in 1973, what is wrong, because there are no knives after 1971 with the +pat stamp.

[xfile]

All I see and all I know, that argumentation - for me - makes no sense at all. On the site of the IGE you find it: "Eine Marke ist vom Anmeldedatum an für jeweils zehn Jahre geschützt. Der Schutz kann beliebig oft um weitere zehn Jahre verlängert werden." That means the patent is valid since the date of the submission. That makes sense. Because everybody can submit a patent. You don`t have to prove anything, and also the IGE does not prove if you are right (new design, new function,...). Thats up to you, up to the person or company, that makes the submit. If you as a private person or as a company think, that someone uses your own patent, that its up to you or them to make an accusation and you have to prove that you are right. So the patent startet in 1951, and victorinox extended it in 1961 for another 10 years. In 1971, the patent protection ended. Thats how it works in switzerland.
Maybe in the US its different, also in other countries. I don`t know how it goes there, but it seems that as long as a patent is not official registered, you had to use that "pat. pend." stamp, and after the registration, they changed to the +pat. And all the evidence I see leads exactly to that direction: very few knives with the pat pend stamp, most (if not all) of them you find in the US and not in europe, and most of them with the philipps.

In your argumentation, it should have startet in 1953 and ended in 1973, what is wrong, because there are no knives after 1971 with the +pat stamp.

Thank you for your knowledge.  I think the reasoning is very clear and correct.

[MiniChamp]

All I see and all I know, that argumentation - for me - makes no sense at all. On the site of the IGE you find it: "Eine Marke ist vom Anmeldedatum an für jeweils zehn Jahre geschützt. Der Schutz kann beliebig oft um weitere zehn Jahre verlängert werden." That means the patent is valid since the date of the submission. That makes sense. Because everybody can submit a patent. You don`t have to prove anything, and also the IGE does not prove if you are right (new design, new function,...). Thats up to you, up to the person or company, that makes the submit. If you as a private person or as a company think, that someone uses your own patent, that its up to you or them to make an accusation and you have to prove that you are right. So the patent startet in 1951, and victorinox extended it in 1961 for another 10 years. In 1971, the patent protection ended. Thats how it works in switzerland.
Maybe in the US its different, also in other countries. I don`t know how it goes there, but it seems that as long as a patent is not official registered, you had to use that "pat. pend." stamp, and after the registration, they changed to the +pat. And all the evidence I see leads exactly to that direction: very few knives with the pat pend stamp, most (if not all) of them you find in the US and not in europe, and most of them with the philipps.

In your argumentation, it should have startet in 1953 and ended in 1973, what is wrong, because there are no knives after 1971 with the +pat stamp.

I don't know what you mean by "official registered." There are two relevant points in time here. The time when the application was submitted (May 7, 1951) and the time when it was approved (namely, the patent was granted; this was on February 28, 1953).

It's certainly true that, if a patent is granted, then the period of patent protection starts from the time when the application was submitted (so, this particular patent expired on May 6, 1971). However, when one applies for a patent, there is no guarantee that it will ever be granted. Hence, it is a lie to claim that something is protected by a patent at any time before the patent is actually granted. The thing that can be legitimately claimed after the submission of an application and before actual granting of a patent is the existence of a PENDING patent application. This is designated by markings such as "PAT. PEND."

The IGE has a page on patent marking where this is explained. (The German language version is at https://www.ige.ch/de/etwas-schuetzen/patente/nach-der-erteilung/kennzeichnung.html )

As far as I can tell from observations, everything here fits very nicely to the legal framework: They used the US PAT PEND stamp from the time when they started making these can openers (and submitted the patent application) in mid-1951 and then after the patent was granted in 1953 they changed the stamp to +PAT and used it until the patent expired in 1971.

[kamakiri]

The machining of *some* of the early ‘large’ +PAT should match that of the US.PAT.PEND openers *if* they were both produced in tandem between ‘51 and early ‘53.

I have not found any, but yes, that does not prove they do not exist.

Perhaps some pictures of early +PAT could prove otherwise.

[jazzbass]

I don't know what you mean by "official registered." There are two relevant points in time here. The time when the application was submitted (May 7, 1951) and the time when it was approved (namely, the patent was granted; this was on February 28, 1953).

It's certainly true that, if a patent is granted, then the period of patent protection starts from the time when the application was submitted (so, this particular patent expired on May 6, 1971). However, when one applies for a patent, there is no guarantee that it will ever be granted. Hence, it is a lie to claim that something is protected by a patent at any time before the patent is actually granted. The thing that can be legitimately claimed after the submission of an application and before actual granting of a patent is the existence of a PENDING patent application. This is designated by markings such as "PAT. PEND."

The IGE has a page on patent marking where this is explained. (The German language version is at https://www.ige.ch/de/etwas-schuetzen/patente/nach-der-erteilung/kennzeichnung.html )

As far as I can tell from observations, everything here fits very nicely to the legal framework: They used the US PAT PEND stamp from the time when they started making these can openers (and submitted the patent application) in mid-1951 and then after the patent was granted in 1953 they changed the stamp to +PAT and used it until the patent expired in 1971.

 
As someone who has personally been through the patent process in both the US and Europe, this is exactly my take on this issue as well.

[kamakiri]

One more point is that if the specific stamp were for the US market only, the typical mark would likely be just PAT.PEND. as there would be no need to specify US.

[elsinox]

Interesting discussion. Me as well thought that the +pat started in 1951, and I think its mainly because you don`t find many of those us pat pend stamped knives in europe. And there should be much more out there, if they stamped all knives with that stamp. Maybe there`s an other reason. Victorinox developed the new can opener and made the submisson. Then they produced some knives and chose the US as a "test" market. There victorinox released some us pat pend models, and after it was successfull and the patent was granted, they released the knives everywhere with the +pat stamp. On the advertising knife thread you find a 52 and a 53 knife with the "old" can opener with swiss advertising. That would support this hypothesis.

One more point is that if the specific stamp were for the US market only, the typical mark would likely be just PAT.PEND. as there would be no need to specify US.

That point I dont understand. Could you explain that? In my understanding, the opposite should be done. I just can`t really understand why victorinox should sell knives in switzerland or europe with a "us pat pend" stamp. They could have used just "pat pend". And I cant find any other patented tool from victorinox where they have done it that way (us pat stamp). How would the people in the US react when a traditional gun or knife company would release products with a "swiss pat pend" stamp? I just don`t think that is a good marketing idea, and that would be the same for the swiss people. I don`t know if you know the history and relations between US and switzerland, what is and was not really good.

I`m not as into patenting as some of you might be. So for an US patent, you have to make an extra patent submission in the US or not? That has nothing to do with this submission from the IGE, or am I wrong? Is there an US pat nr. for this patent available, or has someone found it?

[MiniChamp]

I just can`t really understand why victorinox should sell knives in switzerland or europe with a "us pat pend" stamp. They could have used just "pat pend".

To the best of my limited understanding, the use of patent markings is optional in Europe, but essentially mandatory in the U.S. (in the sense that selling a patented product without proper markings in the U.S. would significantly reduce the protection provided by the patent). I also find it strange that they used "US. PAT. PEND." rather than just "PAT. PEND." and I'm not really sure why they did it this way. I'm guessing that it was somehow beneficial at that time in order to get protection (or a marketing advantage) in the U.S. and that it didn't really hurt them anywhere else.

So for an US patent, you have to make an extra patent submission in the US or not? That has nothing to do with this submission from the IGE, or am I wrong? Is there an US pat nr. for this patent available, or has someone found it?

I am not aware of a U.S. patent for this can opener. The patent is Swiss and, to the best of my understanding, this is what +PAT indicates (the "+" is the Swiss cross).

[elsinox]

Those patent things seem to be quite complicating...

After a bit of searching, I found an international patent for that can opener. It was submitted at the office in germany on the 29.05.1951, with a publication date of the 05.06.1953, publication/patent nr. DE000000878608

There`s also an US patent from 1955, no idea what it is. Title: pocket knife, publication nr. US2718695

And one other international patent from 1903, submitted in france, with the title"FR323119 - Perfectionnements aux canifs et autres objets analogues"

[kamakiri]

Interesting discussion.

I'd still like to see if you can find your earliest +PAT openers and post detailed pics and compare them to some of the US stamped ones. I don't imagine they waited to sell them elsewhere for two whole years, but those advertising knives make for an interesting theory!

[elsinox]

Ok I can ckeck that when I`m at home. I`m not exactly sure what I should look after. What is the difference in the machining between the US PAT PEND and the common +PAT ? The tang or the polishing?

What is also very special, that in the german brochure of the marketing for those new can opener saks, the tangs are blank. That seems very special, compared to the "ges. geschützt" tang, where they used that tanged saks in advertising everywhere and for at least 20 or more years.

The picture added is (I think) from a 1952 brochure.

[elsinox]

Ah and there is written (translated from german): "New can opener patented in several countries"

[jnoxyd]

Great quality picture, Elsinox! Do you have other pics from this catalog (booklet?) Your picture looks very close to another one from ~1954 ( I think it’s 1954 because “70 years of experience” were mentioned).  This picture has +Pat stamp on the can opener and booklet is from Swiss store. I don’t know how, but maybe this will help our discussion.
Sorry for the bad picture, it's not mine to my regret.

[kamakiri]

Ok I can ckeck that when I`m at home. I`m not exactly sure what I should look after. What is the difference in the machining between the US PAT PEND and the common +PAT ? The tang or the polishing?

It’s the differences in machining the final shape before polishing. After the die cut shape stamp.

I suggest sorting for what you know are the earlier main blade tang stamp combinations and go from there.

[elsinox]

It’s the differences in machining the final shape before polishing. After the die cut shape stamp.

I suggest sorting for what you know are the earlier main blade tang stamp combinations and go from there.

So I`ve tried. I see some differences, but I dont get a plan or a clear trend. Maybe you can help. I added fotos of random vintage can openers, all between 51 and 57, with US PAT PEND stamps and some with +PAT stamps. So can you match the stamps with the can openers? Lets try

[kamakiri]

The “ESSR” stamp I put between 1973 and 1976. I have a dated 1976 knife with that stamp.

This knife (not mine) confirms at least ‘76 by its construction details. It is a 237 ‘Camper’.

‘73-‘75 Camper variants have clearly different construction for both Elinox and main line. Also observable in similar ‘related’ knives like Picnickers of the era as well as all the Hoffritz versions of both models.