Multitool.org Forum
Tool Talk => Keychain and One Piece Tools => Topic started by: kirk13 on September 06, 2011, 01:32:39 PM
-
Came across this on evilbay.Thought that for £7.50 from HongKong,it might be worth a punt
(http://i782.photobucket.com/albums/yy104/kirk130013/saks116-1.jpg)
I'm looking forward to seeing how it does.If it works out well might do for a few crimbo prezzies
-
looks ok for the money kirk, have you a link or sellers name :salute:
-
well that is interesting, I look forward to hearing how well it copes. :)
-
looks ok for the money kirk, have you a link or sellers name :salute:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/280730715360?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/280730715360?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649)
-
looks ok for the money kirk, have you a link or sellers name :salute:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/280730715360?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/280730715360?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649)
cheers Kirk :cheers:
-
If there ever was a knock-off... :o ;)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-1D5mqZJT_Ag/TmYSH-GFs0I/AAAAAAAAHTU/1llMCoLVG3E/s400/DSC08652.JPG)
Let us know how it holds up.. :tu:
-
It makes me sick that you guys support a direct copy! ::) Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed. :salute:
-
It makes me sick that you guys support a direct copy! ::) Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed. :salute:
In fairness,I couldnt have told you it was a copy til I started the thread.As cool as Atwoods look,they are the same sorta price as a Wave
-
You are always welcome to your opinion. In fact, I encourage it. BUT this is a tool, available to buyers and as such, we will cover it. We cover anything and everything in this market. If Peter wants us to discourage discussions about things that may or may not infringe on his designs, then he should contact me personally and I'll be happy to set a "no knockoffs" price for him.
Until then, for the same reason as you are allowed to voice your opinion, everyone else is too.
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
-
It makes me sick that you guys support a direct copy! ::) Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed. :salute:
Well I'm not generally one for one piece tools, but if I was going to get something like this I probably wouldn't pay more than £10 for it anyway. Atwood wouldn't make/sell me one for a tenner .... so as I see it, I wouldn't be doing him out of any money cos he wasn't going to get it anyway :shrug:
Then again if I did get a cheapo one and liked it, there would be MORE chance I would then move on to a higher market version. Due to the fact that he sells out on all his items in about 30 seconds flat, I think this is probably doing more good than harm. In fact how many of us only got into knives and tools by starting off at the low end and working up? I know I did. I'd never paid proper money for a proper tool unless I knew it was right for me and worth the investment when put into use. Flip side, I've got quite a few items which were really cheap (Mora, Opinel, SRM) and do the job brilliantly so there's no need to spend big money .... again .... personal opinion :salute:
Bottom line: Keep us informed how you get on with it mate - some of us won't pay big bucks for the elite jobbies, but might sacrifice a couple of quid for one of those :tu:
-
You are always welcome to your opinion. In fact, I encourage it. BUT this is a tool, available to buyers and as such, we will cover it. We cover anything and everything in this market. If Peter wants us to discourage discussions about things that may or may not infringe on his designs, then he should contact me personally and I'll be happy to set a "no knockoffs" price for him.
Until then, for the same reason as you are allowed to voice your opinion, everyone else is too.
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
Def,
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.
I feel strongly about this as you know. Take care everyone!! :salute:
John
-
Yes I know you do. I feel strongly about not deleting accounts so you will be welcome to come back whenever you want, no hard feelings.
The wonderful thing about a forum is it allows people with different opinions to say what they like or don't like about something, which means the other member s have as much right to talk about this as you have to hate it. We won't change you and you won't change them.
Take care out there buddy.
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
-
Looks good for the price! Still, I was wondering how would 8Cr13MoV perform in such type of tool. Atwood also uses knife Steel and/or Ti, but wouldn't be better to use tool steel like D2? ??? I'm quite a noob in this area, so some clarification will be appreciated!!
-
It makes me sick that you guys support a direct copy! ::) Mods: This is my opinion only which Def says I'm allowed. :salute:
I don't think it's fair for the forum to decide what we can discuss and/or support. (specific products, not broad subjects).
If this forum would have bashed somebody because they talked about, bought, sold or hooked people up with a knock-off or cheap alternative I would be pissed off.
With all due respect to Atwood and his products, if he has a problem with these knock-offs he should do something about it, not us. That doesn't mean I like the idea of these.
Patents and such exist for a reason, but they shouldn't effect freedom of speech.
We've talked about plenty of knock-offs and cheap alternatives before without any ill effects.
But as you said, you are entitled to your opinions as we are to ours.
I hope we'll see you around in the future. :salute:
-
@Gadget Guy:No personnal ofense has been ment by this post,and equally none has been taken,and I do hope you wont be leaving MTo as a result of this.
Things I would say are this:None of us are too shy about grabing a bargin where we can,and I gotta say it would be cool to say I had a Ti pocket tool,but I really cant afford one,Atwood or otherwise!Nor could I aford to lose one!
Victorinox make great tools at prices for the everyman(and wenger too!).Gerber likewise,but many of us(myself inclueded)tend to slate them for thier efforts.
If it is a case of copyright infringement,then I'm sure we would all support Atwood in any legal efforts for redress,but if no action is being taken then this is on fact the free market in action!
Any one for a beer? :cheers: I'm buying!
-
Wow, I don't visit this forum often, and I am quite surprised by the degree of acceptance regarding stealing.
I see a few posts regarding the price. So it just comes down to money for you? Doesn't matter if the tool is a blatant copy?
Another post was regarding that Peter should do the leg work to defend his intellectual property. I'm very surprised with this disregard for personal responsibility. "Let somebody else do it" attitude.
So you like the price, so stealing is alright. OK then, I see how general tone of the forum is here.
-
I'm starting to feel sorry I ever started this thread!
1)When I bought this tool I had no idea it may have been a rip off of anything else
2)If you can aford a keyring doda that cost the same as a LM Wave,good for you!I cant!As in airguns,I own a small number of chinese clones of famous European guns.Are they theft?I'm not a lawyer,but the owners of the original designs have never sued!
3)I believe everyone is entitled to an opinion,but for smurf sakes guys!!!!
-
I am not advocating stealing anyone's designs.
However, this is a forum for discussion of multitools- all of them, be they real or copies. We have discussed knockoff SAKs and Leathermans too, so why the special treatment for Peter?
This forum is not beholden to any manufacturers- it is loyal to it's members, and if they want to discuss a certain tool then so be it.
Def
-
Someone one shouldn't be told that stealing is wrong. Just because someone hasn't sued another yet doesn't mean it is right to steal in the meantime. Right is right, wrong is wrong. People should be doing what is right irregardless of who is aware of that person's actions or not. It shouldn't be left for the LEO, court, lawyer, etc. Use you're $ to do what is right.
Discussing and condoning are two very different things. Sure, discuss the copy. I expect that. I also expected that most people would not be in favor of it and not go and make the purchase. Maybe I'm just the minority here, but it was how I was raised.
-
I agree that people should vote with their $$, but you can't be upset when they vote differently than you may.
To be honest, Peter could license some of his designs to a large scale manufacturer and crank out some affordable production versions of his tools while still maintaining his custom, limited run market. The very fact that he hasn't makes me wonder if these copies are really that important to him. If anyone is in contact with Peter they can tell him to contact me by email, through Facebook or through this forum and I will be happy to offer any/all help I can to put him in contact with a company that will do his designs justice.
Add to that the very limited availability of his current line and he's just feeding the copy market. After all, if I want a specific tool and it's not available from him, how else am I supposed to get it?
I'm not condoning or condemning purchasing copies, I'm just suggesting a scenario in which a buyer may feel justified in purchasing a copy. Similar to kit cars- I can't afford a '67 Shelby Cobra myself, but I can afford a VW chassis and a fiberglass body kit.
Individuals are welcome to spend their money any way they like. It's part of living in a free and democratic society. And Multitool.org is dedicated to discussion about tools, regardless of where they come from.
Def
-
Wow, I don't visit this forum often, and I am quite surprised by the degree of acceptance regarding stealing.
Is it stealing? In order to steal a design, the design has to be officially owned by someone. There are very clear procedures to do this. It's called a patent. If these procedures are not followed, then this design can't truly be stolen, since it doesn't belong to anyone.
If Atwood has patented his idea, he has a bit more legal standing. Not you, or me. If he hasn't, he can claim that the idea is his. But any copies are not actually stolen, and are actually free to be copied. This isn't some revolutionary reading of the rules. It's the way the system works, and has for a pretty long time.
-
Yeah, having a patent is a documented way of owning an idea, but does one need documentation at all times to tell him what is right and what is wrong.
Teaching someone early in life about right and wrong starts at home. And I'm pretty sure most of us do not start with teaching our little ones regarding pantents, trademarks and other lawyer related topics.
The point is, it is still someones idea... actually, it's not only that. This particular product is an exact replica one someone else's design, not a design that was inspired by another. And the manufacturer is now producing and selling this design.
Nobody does the right thing all the time, but I would figure that most of us who would do something wrong would know it was wrong and not have to be told the action was wrong.
It is unfortunate we live in a time where too many people feel it is OK to take an idea when they feel they will not be punished for it. Call me old fashioned then.
Lastly, I believe that not condemning one for their actions is quite similar to condoning.
-
I don't know, I have no problem with the Chinese making a copy of Atwood's stuff.
They're never, ever, ever, ever going to take a cent away from him - people who know the name Peter Atwood or JD Ryan or Brian Flud or Jared Price or Ray Kirk or any of the other "boutique" tool or knife makers will ever buy a Chinese tool instead. The more likely scenario is that people buy a one piece tool, find they like it, start researching and then haul out the wallets for the "good" stuff.
Don't believe me? Go ask Coach or Gucci or Prada or Microsoft why they don't work harder to shut down piracy in Asia.
-
I don't know, I have no problem with the Chinese making a copy of Atwood's stuff.
They're never, ever, ever, ever going to take a cent away from him - people who know the name Peter Atwood or JD Ryan or Brian Flud or Jared Price or Ray Kirk or any of the other "boutique" tool or knife makers will ever buy a Chinese tool instead. The more likely scenario is that people buy a one piece tool, find they like it, start researching and then haul out the wallets for the "good" stuff.
Don't believe me? Go ask Coach or Gucci or Prada or Microsoft why they don't work harder to shut down piracy in Asia.
I haven't read a post in this thread about "dictating moral values".
Do what you like, feel what you like, and express what you like. That's what I am doing. I'm just expressing my opinions, and it just happens to be different from the majority here.
I don't know if knifemakers or companies such those listed above are losing money or not. I assume so because I have read about the companies cracking down on bootlegs and imitations. Why they don't work harder? Not sure. I can only make assumptions. Maybe there's a limit to what they can do before it is no longer cost effective. That's my assumption.
-
Yeah, having a patent is a documented way of owning an idea, but does one need documentation at all times to tell him what is right and what is wrong.
Teaching someone early in life about right and wrong starts at home. And I'm pretty sure most of us do not start with teaching our little ones regarding pantents, trademarks and other lawyer related topics.
The point is, it is still someones idea... actually, it's not only that. This particular product is an exact replica one someone else's design, not a design that was inspired by another.
Thing is, if it's patented, Atwood can use the patent to go after copies. And after a set number of years, the patent expires, and copies are fair game.
Yet, time and again, I'm told that even if there is no patent, I'm supposed to limit my consumer choices as if one exists anyway. Which actually goes beyond the protections of an actual patent, as the enforcement is up to the patent holder, not unconnected third parties like you and me. Not only that, I presumably am supposed to honor this non-existent patent in perpetuity, a power that a real patent would never endow. Because that's somehow the difference between right and wrong.
No. I understand the feelings behind such a position. But the wheels come off when put under scrutiny.
-
Well, definitely nobody is going to be punished over something like this. Of course one will do what he is comfortable doing.
I'm not an expert on the topic of patents, but are there such things as international patents?
-
As I see it the G3/G5 Prybaby is the best design Peter has ever done, thus I'll humbly add my two cents to this discussion.
First of all, the only one who should get his panties in a bunch is Peter Atwood himself. I am really appalled by the "Chinese Way" of doing business. It reflects badly on them and will catch up. That out of the way, a businessman has to protect his interests and go after such practices by trademarks, patents and lawyers. An email to Peter to inform him of this blatant theft and a vote with our wallets is all that is needed at the moment.
Secondly, some incoherent ramblings. I am getting more and more alienated by the "Atwood hype". Is he an artist or a businessman? He obviously is in assembly line production on a rather large scale. His designs have become stale. His method of distribution is "strange" and a business case all in itself. He doesn't trademark or patent. So why doesn't he get his act together? A licensing to an impeccable knife/multitool company for his basic tools and artsy, innovative tools in the current business format?! A win-win for both the maker and the many customers?!
-
As I see it the G3/G5 Prybaby is the best design Peter has ever done, thus I'll humbly add my two cents to this discussion.
First of all, the only one who should get his panties in a bunch is Peter Atwood himself. I am really appalled by the "Chinese Way" of doing business. It reflects badly on them and will catch up. That out of the way, a businessman has to protect his interests and go after such practices by trademarks, patents and lawyers. An email to Peter to inform him of this blatant theft and a vote with our wallets is all that is needed at the moment.
The "Chinese Way" of doing business? American knife and tool companies copy designs from each other on a very regular basis. They've also been doing it a lot longer - Ka-Bar and Schrade, for example, made well-known copies of the Buck 110 Folding Hunter for years and years. In fact, the Schrade Lb7 folder is still made to this day.
Also, if I remember correctly we had this discussion multiple times when PocketToolX (then MK7) first started showing models of the Piranha and it was being compared to various Atwood tools.
Out and out copying tool designs is by no means limited to China. Or the US. Heck, there are very well made German knives patterned on Swiss Army knives being made to this day.
-
Here's my take on the issue; if I want to buy an Atwood right now then I simply can't, not without getting into the price inflated second hand market, where the re-sale value seems to be even higher than the original price, or am I wrong?
The way Mr Atwood seems to run his business means that he is never going to have stock sitting on the shelf waiting to be sold, so these copies are not ever going to make any difference to his current business model, or income. And good luck to him, it's a very interesting and clever way to run a business. :salute:
Would I prefer it to be at least a little different from Mr Atwood's design? Absolutely yes I would, but at lest it's only a copy and not a fake claiming to actual be an Atwood.
Do I think Mr Atwood will loose any money? Not in a month of Sundays. :D In fact, as was pointed out earlier in the thread, these could easily be 'gateway' tools to someone who would then go on to try and but a tool direct form Atwood. If the person could get their hands on one that is. ;)
-
Well, definitely nobody is going to be punished over something like this. Of course one will do what he is comfortable doing.
I'm not an expert on the topic of patents, but are there such things as international patents?
Yes there are such thing as international patents, but they only apply in countries that are willing to honor such things.
Patents are virtually worthless to someone like Peter by the way. A patent is a document stating that you own something and are entitled to all the rights that go along with it. Very handy, but the reality is that small businessmen like myself, Peter, JDR, Raker Knives and many of the other companies listed in this thread simply cannot afford to enforce a patent. It involves lots of legal fees, and that's assuming it's even a domestic dispute, which in today's world is not likely. If you have to chase a patent across a border it costs a lot more, especially if you have to go after it in places like China, and if you do follow it that far, the company that made it is likely to "go out of business" for an hour, re-open with a new sign on the door and continue to knock off your designs under a new name, meaning you have wasted all your money and have to start from scratch.
That's a bit simplified mind you, but if you chat with a lawyer for any length of time (s)he will probably tell you the same thing.
What you can do with some success is communicate with Customs Officials in countries that do honor patent and trademark law to have out and out fakes confiscated upon entry into their country. But, this often means they need to be direct copies, such as in the case of red handled Swiss Army Style knockoffs featuring some variety of a Swiss Cross. As you can see by the number of SAK copies available today, this is also pretty ineffectual, but at least it means that direct knockoffs are seized and your brand is relatively protected.
I don't condone stealing ideas but it is a fact of life. The up shot is, I can't see Peter losing any money off of this, and in fact, probably gaining money as it potentially introduces new people to the market who may purchase one of his tools later, and it galvanizes his existing customers as loyal buyers. This doesn't mean we should purposely promote this tool as a favor to Peter, but it also doesn't mean we should condemn it either.
It is a tool and it's available for purchase, therefore we have not only a right, but a responsibility to review it. Here at Multitool.org a tool stands or falls on it's abilities, not what's etched on it's side.
Def
-
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.
-
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
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
Well, artists can't be bothered with bureaucratic stuff.
-
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. >:D
-
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. >:D
Nate's just the right man for the job imo.. >:D >:D
;) :D
-
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. :cry: 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.
-
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.
-
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. :cheers:
-
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.
Since this is the part that is addressed to me, this is what I suppose I should respond to.
The bit I said about charging Peter has nothing to do with changing my opinion. It has everything to do with this being my forum and as long as I own it lock stock and barrel, we'll keep an open mind about things. If Peter (or anyone else) wants to have a share of this site then my open mind will listen to them. Until then, I pay the bills, the site is run my way. Tough titties to anyone who doesn't like it.
That's an unfair shot about me hocking things on EDCSource. First off, nothing is free, but for the most part this forum is for members. I pay for everything out of pocket, and I don't think a commercial end is out of the question, and it is separate from the forum so you don't have to go to EDCSource if you don't want to. And, find me an item I currently have for sale at EDCSource- I don't sell anything there because I feel it would be a conflict of interest since I'm the owner and the seller, which could cause issues with any disputes.
At any rate, feel free to keep posting your thoughts- as I said, you are entitled to your opinion.
Def
-
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.
Since this is the part that is addressed to me, this is what I suppose I should respond to.
The bit I said about charging Peter has nothing to do with changing my opinion. It has everything to do with this being my forum and as long as I own it lock stock and barrel, we'll keep an open mind about things. If Peter (or anyone else) wants to have a share of this site then my open mind will listen to them. Until then, I pay the bills, the site is run my way. Tough titties to anyone who doesn't like it.
That's an unfair shot about me hocking things on EDCSource. First off, nothing is free, but for the most part this forum is for members. I pay for everything out of pocket, and I don't think a commercial end is out of the question, and it is separate from the forum so you don't have to go to EDCSource if you don't want to. And, find me an item I currently have for sale at EDCSource- I don't sell anything there because I feel it would be a conflict of interest since I'm the owner and the seller, which could cause issues with any disputes.
At any rate, feel free to keep posting your thoughts- as I said, you are entitled to your opinion.
Def
Wow, talk about the land of splitting hairs. ::) I didn't mean that you personally sold fakes over at EDCSource, but that you would indeed allow them to be sold there. EDCSource is not stand alone. We get the listings over here that sometimes clog up pages, but like you said you pay the bills and are the top guy in charge, I get it. :salute:
-
Splitting hairs? I'm not sure I understand what you mean? Please elaborate.
I don't have any stake in Peter's business, therefore I don't dictate what he does with it. I think it's only fair that it goes both ways.
And, I'm not sure how many other businesses would still be operating after six years of giving the product away for free.
If you have problems with the way the site is run, by all means let me know and I'll take it under advisement. I would prefer a PM about it, or I'm sure you have my phone number, I'd be happy to discuss it that way too, but if you'd rather do that in the open, I'm up for that too.
Def
-
In case you wonder who I don't respond for a bit, I'm off for a short nap. It's nothing personal! :pok:
Def
-
This isn't about you and me. I apologize for making any comments on how you run you businesses. :salute: I'll keep it to pm's in the future...
-
Drifting back to the tool for a bit ...
I applaud your passion John, but I suppose I draw the line in a different place as to what is a fake. Is a vaccuum cleaner other than a Hoover a fake? What about a mass produced car other than a Ford? Too diverse - OK - what about ball point pens?
I must echo again that these are not counterfeit. These are not items pretending to be something they are not, or pretending to be made by someone they are not. They are just cheaply produced similies. You relate to the Atwood tools as an art form made by someone who is an artist first and a tool maker second, so lets examine other art forms .... fashion ... yes you have firms making knock off Levis, trying to scam buyers into buying their inferior good by fraudulently assuming the name of a market leader ... then you've got other firms just making cheap jeans with a nondescript totally seperate branding. I would not knowingly buy knock off Levis - I would buy otherwise branded cheap jeans - even if they were styled after one of the bigger name's products.
Hopefully this clarifies the differentiation that a lot of people are putting on this topic. Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and it's not IMHO fraud or theft is this particular scenario. If I thought it was theft, I wouldn't condone it and I'm very sure there ain't many others here that would either.
EDIT: I ought to add I've been in manufacturing all my working life, both from the perspective of a service provider and a OEM so I fully understand the passion behind your views. We just have different interpretations of where imitation/inspiration becomes theft
-
Drifting back to the tool for a bit ...
I applaud your passion John, but I suppose I draw the line in a different place as to what is a fake. Is a vaccuum cleaner other than a Hoover a fake? What about a mass produced car other than a Ford? Too diverse - OK - what about ball point pens?
I must echo again that these are not counterfeit. These are not items pretending to be something they are not, or pretending to be made by someone they are not. They are just cheaply produced similies. You relate to the Atwood tools as an art form made by someone who is an artist first and a tool maker second, so lets examine other art forms .... fashion ... yes you have firms making knock off Levis, trying to scam buyers into buying their inferior good by fraudulently assuming the name of a market leader ... then you've got other firms just making cheap jeans with a nondescript totally seperate branding. I would not knowingly buy knock off Levis - I would buy otherwise branded cheap jeans - even if they were styled after one of the bigger name's products.
Hopefully this clarifies the differentiation that a lot of people are putting on this topic. Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and it's not IMHO fraud or theft is this particular scenario. If I thought it was theft, I wouldn't condone it and I'm very sure there ain't many others here that would either.
EDIT: I ought to add I've been in manufacturing all my working life, both from the perspective of a service provider and a OEM so I fully understand the passion behind your views. We just have different interpretations of where imitation/inspiration becomes theft
Actually, fashion makes a very good example because there is a lot in common between fashion and tools.
Namely, it was decided a long time ago in US and International Courts that individual parts of clothing and design could not be patented because the holder of a patent on say... men's shirt collars could control the market to the detriment of the consumer for *years*. This has not, to my knowledge, proven negative in any way to the consumer or the fashion industry as a whole.
It's the same in tools - individual components cannot be patented. You can't hold a patent on a box wrench, you can't hold a patent on a hammer. You might be able to get a patent on a very specific mechanical means of doing the job a box wrench or hammer does, but even that's kind of murky - Spyderco was unable to trademark the round opening hole even though it was a Spyderco design for 20+ years. Benchmade has a patent on the Axis lock but that didn't stop a ton of companies from taking the basic design, tweaking it very slightly and making their own versions (Spyderco Ball Bearing Lock, Sog Piston lock, Sog Arc Lock, etc.). Look and feel patents wouldn't work either - Mr. Atwood himself has said that he was inspired by old style alligator wrenches, and they would be considered prior art.
-
I don't like stealing or being stolen from as much as any decent guy.
But where do we draw the line?
If people didn't "borrow ideas" from one another we would just have 1 kind of everything. And many things wouldn't exist today.
Why buy a samsung galaxy? it's a rip off of the iphone.
There are so many cheap alternatives to original higher priced products that have some kind of brand or a name that's worth more money.
Why should I buy gap when I can get old navy clothes for less?
Many technological advances have been made greatly due to taking somebodies idea or invention and changing it, and I'm sure a large number of times the other side didn't like the fact that someboy used their idea.
Like I said before, if Peter Atwood wants to go after them, that's his decision. I won't
As long as I have a choice, and it's legal then I will decide which product to buy.
If I decide to go the cheap way I'll be fully aware of the consequences.
If I buy a fake product that claims to be original, that's whole other story.
By the way, this is a very interesting discussion.
I won't hold a grudge to anyone and I do hope it doesn't get out of hand.
-
I've got an Atwood :salute: :tu:
(http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af203/cerbera147/EDC%20Setup/S1054199.jpg)
-
Here's a couple of interesting articles about design patent infringement:
Design Patent Infringement Post-Egyptian Goddess (http://blogs.mvalaw.com/iplawblog/2010/05/28/design-patent-infringement-post-egyptian-goddess/)
Design Patent Infringement Analysis and the Fubar (http://infringingactions.blogspot.com/2010/03/design-patent-infringement-analysis-and.html)
-
That's interesting. It seems that the courts ignore functional features, and only look at ornamental features when deciding on infringement.
So in this case they would most likely disregard the wrench, cap lifter and pry bar, leaving only the ornamental imprinting and edge design. Both of which seem to have been purposefully changed in the Chinese model.
Very interesting indeed...
-
If anyone is interested, I posted my thoughts on another one-piece tool by this same company over the in the reviews section: http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,30886.0.html (http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,30886.0.html)
-
That's interesting. It seems that the courts ignore functional features, and only look at ornamental features when deciding on infringement.
So in this case they would most likely disregard the wrench, cap lifter and pry bar, leaving only the ornamental imprinting and edge design. Both of which seem to have been purposefully changed in the Chinese model.
Very interesting indeed...
Actually, I saw the Egyptian Goddess ruling as having a positive effect in a case like this. Would it pass the "ordinary observer test"? I wouldn't think so. There is just too much similarity overall. If Mr. Atwood had a design patent in the US I would bet a simple "cease and desist" letter from an attorney would be enough to get the importer to drop it from their line. Most companies don't want to get involved in a lawsuit they know they can't win.
-
That's interesting. It seems that the courts ignore functional features, and only look at ornamental features when deciding on infringement.
So in this case they would most likely disregard the wrench, cap lifter and pry bar, leaving only the ornamental imprinting and edge design. Both of which seem to have been purposefully changed in the Chinese model.
Very interesting indeed...
Actually, I saw the Egyptian Goddess ruling as having a positive effect in a case like this. Would it pass the "ordinary observer test"? I wouldn't think so. There is just too much similarity overall. If Mr. Atwood had a design patent in the US I would bet a simple "cease and desist" letter from an attorney would be enough to get the importer to drop it from their line. Most companies don't want to get involved in a lawsuit they know they can't win.
The Navy tools all have their own branding applied quite clearly to them. There is no attempt to pass them off as Atwood tools. You give an "ordinary observer" an Atwood and the Navy tool and it would be easy for them to tell the difference.
And there are no US-based importers, so a cease-and-desist letter wouldn't do anything anyways. If the Navy tools end up anywhere except China they're sold as one-offs.
-
The Navy tools all have their own branding applied quite clearly to them. There is no attempt to pass them off as Atwood tools. You give an "ordinary observer" an Atwood and the Navy tool and it would be easy for them to tell the difference.
That's an interesting point. I'm meeting my patent attorney friend for drinks later, I'll ask him what he thinks.
And there are no US-based importers, so a cease-and-desist letter wouldn't do anything anyways. If the Navy tools end up anywhere except China they're sold as one-offs.
That was really just hypothetical example of how one might be able to protect their intellectual property without a protracted court battle.
-
Drifting back to the tool for a bit ...
I applaud your passion John, but I suppose I draw the line in a different place as to what is a fake. Is a vaccuum cleaner other than a Hoover a fake? What about a mass produced car other than a Ford? Too diverse - OK - what about ball point pens?
I must echo again that these are not counterfeit. These are not items pretending to be something they are not, or pretending to be made by someone they are not. They are just cheaply produced similies. You relate to the Atwood tools as an art form made by someone who is an artist first and a tool maker second, so lets examine other art forms .... fashion ... yes you have firms making knock off Levis, trying to scam buyers into buying their inferior good by fraudulently assuming the name of a market leader ... then you've got other firms just making cheap jeans with a nondescript totally seperate branding. I would not knowingly buy knock off Levis - I would buy otherwise branded cheap jeans - even if they were styled after one of the bigger name's products.
Hopefully this clarifies the differentiation that a lot of people are putting on this topic. Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and it's not IMHO fraud or theft is this particular scenario. If I thought it was theft, I wouldn't condone it and I'm very sure there ain't many others here that would either.
EDIT: I ought to add I've been in manufacturing all my working life, both from the perspective of a service provider and a OEM so I fully understand the passion behind your views. We just have different interpretations of where imitation/inspiration becomes theft
Actually, fashion makes a very good example because there is a lot in common between fashion and tools.
Namely, it was decided a long time ago in US and International Courts that individual parts of clothing and design could not be patented because the holder of a patent on say... men's shirt collars could control the market to the detriment of the consumer for *years*. This has not, to my knowledge, proven negative in any way to the consumer or the fashion industry as a whole.
It's the same in tools - individual components cannot be patented. You can't hold a patent on a box wrench, you can't hold a patent on a hammer. You might be able to get a patent on a very specific mechanical means of doing the job a box wrench or hammer does, but even that's kind of murky - Spyderco was unable to trademark the round opening hole even though it was a Spyderco design for 20+ years. Benchmade has a patent on the Axis lock but that didn't stop a ton of companies from taking the basic design, tweaking it very slightly and making their own versions (Spyderco Ball Bearing Lock, Sog Piston lock, Sog Arc Lock, etc.). Look and feel patents wouldn't work either - Mr. Atwood himself has said that he was inspired by old style alligator wrenches, and they would be considered prior art.
For your information, the Spyderhole has been AA registered trademark since Jan 1995.
-
For your information, the Spyderhole has been AA registered trademark since Jan 1995.
Yet Spyderco was unable to stop Benchmade from using it in the Ally, Soldat, Vex or Pika series of knives because it was decided that it was an unenforceable trademark. The Soldat, Ally and Pika are still being produced and sold right now.
Thanks for proving my point.
-
:sak:
For your information, the Spyderhole has been AA registered trademark since Jan 1995.
Yet Spyderco was unable to stop Benchmade from using it in the Ally, Soldat, Vex or Pika series of knives because it was decided that it was an unenforceable trademark. The Soldat, Ally and Pika are still being produced and sold right now.
Thanks for proving my point.
No problem. I'm glad you feel I proved a point you had difficulty proving yourself. Just kidding buddy. :D
On the same token, the knifemaker Mick Strider has attained the license to use the Spyderhole on his customs which he does, but he refuses to use the Spyderhole on his productions because of trademark infringements, whether it can be enforced or not. I give Mick Strider respect for his decision on his usage Spyderco's hole.
-
For your information, the Spyderhole has been AA registered trademark since Jan 1995.
Yet Spyderco was unable to stop Benchmade from using it in the Ally, Soldat, Vex or Pika series of knives because it was decided that it was an unenforceable trademark. The Soldat, Ally and Pika are still being produced and sold right now.
Thanks for proving my point.
Wasn't there an out of court settlement / agreement between Spyderco and Benchmade?
-
Wasn't there an out of court settlement / agreement between Spyderco and Benchmade?
They did for a while, but that agreement was annulled because Benchmade wasn't giving credit to Spyderco for for the Hole in literature. Didn't stop Benchmade from continuing to use it, though.
-
Has there been any release of any new models from Benchmade using the Spyderhole? I'm just wondering if an agreement was made for it's use with currently released models and no future releases from Benchmade.
-
Edit: Forget it.
-
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. :cry: 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.
This hints at one reason I suspect some folks take umbrage at copied things: defenders against copying often have some kind of skin in the game, even if it's not tangible, like pride. I've seen this with other things, like knife designs and so on. It seems that the more pricey and exclusive ownership is, the more passionate the opinion over copies.
I realize yours is a passionately held position. But it does not strike me as particularly strong, as your case hinges on your personal moral authority, not on any particular damages perpetrated.
-
Awww, I'm in late on this party. Anyway, there is nothing patentable on an Atwood tool, literally nothing. :P
And as an artist, he should be able to sell his art despite similar products anyway. :tu:
-
The Navy tools all have their own branding applied quite clearly to them. There is no attempt to pass them off as Atwood tools. You give an "ordinary observer" an Atwood and the Navy tool and it would be easy for them to tell the difference.
Well I had a strong suspicion this was wrong but figured since I had access to an expert I'd wait until I spoke with him. According to my friend you would just claim the shape of the object and not any surface treatment such as branding. So even though one tool said Navy and the other Atwood the only issue for determining design patent infringement would be whether the "ordinary observer" found the shape of the Navy tool to be substantially similar to the Atwood tool, and I think it's safe to say that Navy would lose this battle in court. Since there is no design patent on this tool this is all academic but it do think it worth noting that if an artist or designer is concerned with theft of their intellectual property they could obtain a design patent on their work for about $1000, less if they did it themselves. Utility patents on the other hand are very expensive and really need to be very carefully written by a smart and experienced patent attorney in order for the patent holder to be given good protection.
-
The Navy tools all have their own branding applied quite clearly to them. There is no attempt to pass them off as Atwood tools. You give an "ordinary observer" an Atwood and the Navy tool and it would be easy for them to tell the difference.
Well I had a strong suspicion this was wrong but figured since I had access to an expert I'd wait until I spoke with him. According to my friend you would just claim the shape of the object and not any surface treatment such as branding. So even though one tool said Navy and the other Atwood the only issue for determining design patent infringement would be whether the "ordinary observer" found the shape of the Navy tool to be substantially similar to the Atwood tool, and I think it's safe to say that Navy would lose this battle in court. Since there is no design patent on this tool this is all academic but it do think it worth noting that if an artist or designer is concerned with theft of their intellectual property they could obtain a design patent on their work for about $1000, less if they did it themselves. Utility patents on the other hand are very expensive and really need to be very carefully written by a smart and experienced patent attorney in order for the patent holder to be given good protection.
You realize that the cases you posted earlier in this thread blatantly contradict the advice you just received from this attorney, yes?
The relevant quote would be:
"In so doing, the district court distinguished “the ornamental aspects from the functional aspects of Richardson’s design and then determined that an ordinary observer, after discounting the functional elements of Richardson’s design, would not be deceived into thinking that any of the Fubar tools were the same as Richardson’s Stepclaw.”
One is advice gotten over lunch from an attorney without knowing full facts of the case at hand, the other is on the books as a legal decision.
But, again, as you said this is all academic until Peter Atwood takes the necessary steps to attain design patents.
-
The Navy tools all have their own branding applied quite clearly to them. There is no attempt to pass them off as Atwood tools. You give an "ordinary observer" an Atwood and the Navy tool and it would be easy for them to tell the difference.
Well I had a strong suspicion this was wrong but figured since I had access to an expert I'd wait until I spoke with him. According to my friend you would just claim the shape of the object and not any surface treatment such as branding. So even though one tool said Navy and the other Atwood the only issue for determining design patent infringement would be whether the "ordinary observer" found the shape of the Navy tool to be substantially similar to the Atwood tool, and I think it's safe to say that Navy would lose this battle in court. Since there is no design patent on this tool this is all academic but it do think it worth noting that if an artist or designer is concerned with theft of their intellectual property they could obtain a design patent on their work for about $1000, less if they did it themselves. Utility patents on the other hand are very expensive and really need to be very carefully written by a smart and experienced patent attorney in order for the patent holder to be given good protection.
You realize that the cases you posted earlier in this thread blatantly contradict the advice you just received from this attorney, yes?
Please explain
-
Did you actually look at the Fubar vs. the Stepclaw, there are some very obvious design differences.
-
Navy, being a Chinese company would likely not pay much attention to a cease and desist order from a US attorney or court, which is why the so called "protection" of a patent wouldn't be terribly effective. The last time I checked, the US legal system doesn't have any control over what goes on in China, despite what Hollywood would have us believe.
In a case like Atwood Vs Navy, chances are Peter would spend the money to obtain some kind of "protection" then spend more money to "enforce" it, and Navy would just giggle and keep on keeping on. The "protection" of a registered patent would really only end up costing (hurting) Peter who is already the victim in said claim, although his attorney would probably be quite happy to encourage him to take action.
As an investigator by trade I spent an awful lot of time and someone else's money trying to find ways of making things like this work, and they simply don't. Unless you have a lot of money backing you, you can't chase someone internationally, and that's even in a country that has agreements in place for things like patent law.
Def
-
Never mind Atwood vs Navy, I wanna see Navy vs Nate's Tractor >:D
-
That's not very far off I think. We have purchased one and it's on it's way to Nate's for a head to head with the real thing.
Def
-
Dumb question:
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
-
Nope- I'd buy an Atwood based on name alone. Tragically when I see them available they are a little rich for my blood.
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
-
Never mind Atwood vs Navy, I wanna see Navy vs Nate's Tractor >:D
I have a few "tests" in mind...
(http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z231/bluebadger88/misc/smilie/firedevil.gif)
-
Never mind Atwood vs Navy, I wanna see Navy vs Nate's Tractor >:D
I have a few "tests" in mind...
(http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z231/bluebadger88/misc/smilie/firedevil.gif)
Splendid :D :D I really hope the little feller does well
I'd expect to see it manage maybe 60-70% of what the Atwoood can do :think:
I'd hate to see it bend or fracture on the "cleaning under the fingernail" test :-\
-
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
That is because you are buying a piece of art. Art is something you put on the wall and smile at becuase wow, you have it, and owning that art makes you feel good.
A tool is, well, a tool. You use it to do things with. It gets dirty. It gets hot and cold and wet and muddy and scratched up and you don't freak out, you just break out the oil and maybe the steel wool.
Don't own an Atwood. Once he made tools. Now he makes art. Wish he made tools again and on a somewhat predictable pattern rather than his erratic dribs and drabs, then maybe I'd own a few Atwoods.
-
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
That is because you are buying a piece of art. Art is something you put on the wall and smile at becuase wow, you have it, and owning that art makes you feel good.
A tool is, well, a tool. You use it to do things with. It gets dirty. It gets hot and cold and wet and muddy and scratched up and you don't freak out, you just break out the oil and maybe the steel wool.
Don't own an Atwood. Once he made tools. Now he makes art. Wish he made tools again and on a somewhat predictable pattern rather than his erratic dribs and drabs, then maybe I'd own a few Atwoods.
I use every single Atwood tool that I own. It may be art, but it works pretty good as a tool. :tu:
-
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
That is because you are buying a piece of art. Art is something you put on the wall and smile at becuase wow, you have it, and owning that art makes you feel good.
A tool is, well, a tool. You use it to do things with. It gets dirty. It gets hot and cold and wet and muddy and scratched up and you don't freak out, you just break out the oil and maybe the steel wool.
Don't own an Atwood. Once he made tools. Now he makes art. Wish he made tools again and on a somewhat predictable pattern rather than his erratic dribs and drabs, then maybe I'd own a few Atwoods.
I use every single Atwood tool that I own. It may be art, but it works pretty good as a tool. :tu:
I agree John. All but one of my Atwoods have been used. I havent used the Rainbow Perfbaby yet.
-
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
That is because you are buying a piece of art. Art is something you put on the wall and smile at becuase wow, you have it, and owning that art makes you feel good.
A tool is, well, a tool. You use it to do things with. It gets dirty. It gets hot and cold and wet and muddy and scratched up and you don't freak out, you just break out the oil and maybe the steel wool.
Don't own an Atwood. Once he made tools. Now he makes art. Wish he made tools again and on a somewhat predictable pattern rather than his erratic dribs and drabs, then maybe I'd own a few Atwoods.
I use every single Atwood tool that I own. It may be art, but it works pretty good as a tool. :tu:
I agree John. All but one of my Atwoods have been used. I havent used the Rainbow Perfbaby yet.
Wow, somebody actually agrees with me in this thread! :D
-
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
That is because you are buying a piece of art. Art is something you put on the wall and smile at becuase wow, you have it, and owning that art makes you feel good.
A tool is, well, a tool. You use it to do things with. It gets dirty. It gets hot and cold and wet and muddy and scratched up and you don't freak out, you just break out the oil and maybe the steel wool.
Don't own an Atwood. Once he made tools. Now he makes art. Wish he made tools again and on a somewhat predictable pattern rather than his erratic dribs and drabs, then maybe I'd own a few Atwoods.
I use every single Atwood tool that I own. It may be art, but it works pretty good as a tool. :tu:
I agree John. All but one of my Atwoods have been used. I havent used the Rainbow Perfbaby yet.
Wow, somebody actually agrees with me in this thread! :D
In more ways than one John. :D
-
Dumb question:
Am I the only one here that would consider buying an Atwood because of the maker/name, with the tool itself being a very distant secondary consideration?
Oh there are tons of other people just like you, how else could apple sell so many iphone/pads? :D
-
Hmmmm...
The ebay auction listing this item abruptly ended this afternoon. Someone complained perhaps....
-
Hmmmm...
The ebay auction listing this item abruptly ended this afternoon. Someone complained perhaps....
Or, you know, the auction just ended. This seller only lists stuff for 1 or 2 week auctions, not for a month. The auction ended at exactly 7:45:00PM PDT. It would be incredibly unlikely for a pulled auction to end on an exact minute mark, but incredibly likely if it was a scheduled start and end.
-
Hmmmm...
The ebay auction listing this item abruptly ended this afternoon. Someone complained perhaps....
Or, you know, the auction just ended. This seller only lists stuff for 1 or 2 week auctions, not for a month. The auction ended at exactly 7:45:00PM PDT. It would be incredibly unlikely for a pulled auction to end on an exact minute mark, but incredibly likely if it was a scheduled start and end.
OK, I didn't check the time. I thought there was like a week and a half left on the auction. There were over 20 pieces still available.
You're probably right though. Perhaps it will be relisted then.
-
Sooo....
Nate, how did the tool hold up?
John, I hope you are still with us.
Despite the arguments presented here, from an observers point of view this forum does not condone stealing and never has IIRC. We discuss LM knockoffs and SAK knockoffs, there is no difference in discussing Atwood knockoffs. I personally wouldn't ever buy a knockoff instead of the real thing, but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in how good a facsimile is if only for the curiosity factor.
I agree strongly with the Freedom of Speech that is allowed here, something we all use on a daily basis. We are a forum of MT intellectuals, not retailers.
-
Sooo....
Nate, how did the tool hold up?
Just picked it up from the post office today. (We don't get home delivery and have to get to the post office before it closes--missed last week due to tractor shopping).
My first observations are:
1. It's much smaller than an Atwood with much lighter metal. I'm planning on testing them today (Saturday) and will report back. :salute:
-
This will be interesting. :D
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/jooliesews/Bobbys/smileys/popcorn.gif)
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/jooliesews/Bobbys/smileys/popcorn.gif)
Ditto...
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/jooliesews/Bobbys/smileys/popcorn.gif)
Ditto...
Def
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
+1 ...
-
Just picked it up from the post office today. (We don't get home delivery and have to get to the post office before it closes--missed last week due to tractor shopping).
Did they finally closed the local post office? I recall you were saying they were trying to do that.
-
Just picked it up from the post office today. (We don't get home delivery and have to get to the post office before it closes--missed last week due to tractor shopping).
Did they finally closed the local post office? I recall you were saying they were trying to do that.
Not yet, but I believe it's a foregone conclusion. The USPS is losing money so fast, they may have to declare bankruptcy. Sad really. Lots of options they refuse to even consider.
-
I wonder if free postage within the US has something to do with that.
-
I wonder if free postage within the US has something to do with that.
No, free shipping is built into the price of the item (USPS Flat Rate boxes). Mostly people are not mailing stuff at the same volume (online bill paying, email, e-vites, e-birthday cards, email sales promotions).
At the same time, USPS refuses to make changes that would increase walk in traffic. I can walk into an Office Depot (UPS) or Fedex location up until 10 pm and on Sat and Sun and ship a package. USPS is generally 9-4 weekdays and 9-12 Saturday. When I suggested maybe they shift their hours from 9-1 pm (our post office) to 4-8 pm, they acted like I suggested changing the laws of physics.
Anyway, looks like I'm going to have to change post offices. >:( :(
-
My local Post office is only open until 3pm daily. The one in the Town I work in is only open until 4:30pm. They are so lame! I work from 8 to 6 every day, I don't see why the PO can't keep normal hours.
-
Starting to sound like banking hours.
Well many years ago, Canada Post got out of the small outlet business...therefore, most Canada Post outlets are now privately owned. That increased the hours and the service all around. Still Canada Post that does the actual delivery...and they are slow on a good day. :)
Point of fact, I have noticed I don't get mail when it rains.
-
We never get mail :cry:
-
I get random mail. There are days when she delivers at 9am and days when she delivers at 5pm. I can always count on it being later if I am expecting something, but if it's bills we have it really early!
The problem with my local office is the average age of my community, which is 53. The older portion all still go to the post office to mail anything, even letters, so there is a huge line whenever I go in. A lot of them have second homes here so they are flying in and having to get about 15 lbs of mail, still more can't figure out why their forwarded mail isn't arriving, and a few have enormous packages to send and they don't like the price. And every single one of them thinks they are personal friends with the clerk, so they try to stand there and joke for much too long. I just know our clerk well, so I address her by first name, make small talk while she weighs what I'm shipping(almost always a tool), and then leave with a wave.
-
... The problem with my local office is the average age of my community, which is 53. The older portion all still go to the post office to mail anything, even letters, so there is a huge line whenever I go in.
This is actually a good thing. Being a philatelist, I've gotten to know my Post Master over the years (yes I'm one of those who thinks they are personal friends with the clerk, so they try to stand there and joke for much too long. ;)) And in recent conversations, I've learned that as the USPS has begun gutting the organization in order to make it profitable, the number one thing they look for in whether or not to close any particular office is if it is making money. So the longer the lines, the better :tu:
-
When I suggested maybe they shift their hours from 9-1 pm (our post office) to 4-8 pm, they acted like I suggested changing the laws of physics.
You want union postal workers to work after hours? Are you insane? :D
Most of our postal outlet here are contracted to various drug stores and operate with similar schedule to them, i.e. till 9 PM most of the days.
-
Great OT Union story:
My brother-in-law ran the carpet installation division of a large office supply company in Detroit, he had a problem though, his crew was not union, so he could not bid on any "union only" jobs. To fix this he got his crew together and asked if they wouldn't mind organizing under the Carpenters Union, and that he would give them all a one time pay raise to cover the union dues.
They all agreed, so he called the head of the Carpenter's Union in Detroit, told him about the plan, and also told him of the one concession that he wanted in the contract. Since his crew did mostly business at night, he wanted their regular time pay to be the first eight hours they worked in any 24 hour period, anything above that to be over time. The union head said no and would not budge, he stood firm on 8am to 5pm as being the only regular time, and any other hours were overtime.
So when they could not come to an agreement, he called up the head of the Teamsters in Detroit. The Teamsters leader was absolutely floored that a manager of any company would actually call him and ask for his crew to be part of the Union (Management - Union has always been a hate-hate relationship around here). The Teamsters head agreed to the terms, contracts were drawn up, and everything was signed and done in two weeks. The head of the Teamsters even sent my brother-in-law a large screen projection television as a "thank-you" gift, everyone was happy.
Well, when he won his first "union only" bid (a new construction project), the head of the Carpenter's Union heard about it and called him up, and my in-law told him that his crew were Teamsters now, and that there is nothing he can do about it. There was a lot of shouting, and they both got smurfed off, with the head of the Carpenter's telling him that "You're not getting away with this"
When the time came for his crew to start work on the project, they could not get in. The Carpenter's Union was picketing and blocking the entrance. My brother-in-law called the Teamsters head and told him that the Carpenter's would not let his crew work, the Teamsters head said: "Give me a little time, and call me back when they are let in"
About an hour latter my in-law's phone rang, and it was the head of the Carpenter's, he said to him: "We have a little problem here". As it turns out none of his building materials were being delivered, and also none of his garbage was being picked up (both jobs run by the Teamsters :D) My brother-in-law said to him "We don't have a problem, you have a problem" and hung up the phone.
Five minutes latter the picket line was gone, and never heard from again.
-
This has been a fascinating thread to read on a long commute, honestly I was sorry when I got to the last post, I'm fairly new to this world, it's great to see the passion, I have my first Atwood en route from Ma. to Australia as I write, can't wait to get it!
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=-33.888301,151.127804