I was wrong....

[Gadget Guy]

Or what about this.  Did Mr. Emerson steal an idea from Victorinox?

http://www.emersonknives.com/ekEmersonShow.php

Scroll down for Custom CQC6 with tweezers.

Now that is funny!!         I think Mr. Emerson owes Victorinox one quid because he used tweezers on two custom knives. Pay up Mr. Emerson!   

[Zack]

Or what about this.  Did Mr. Emerson steal an idea from Victorinox?

http://www.emersonknives.com/ekEmersonShow.php

Scroll down for Custom CQC6 with tweezers.

Now that is funny!!         I think Mr. Emerson owes Victorinox one quid because he used tweezers on two custom knives. Pay up Mr. Emerson!   

But is he stealing a design?  I realize its petty, but who is to say this won't be a feature on upcoming models, or maybe this was his idea of a multitool.  OHO blade, bottle opener, tweezers.

[Gadget Guy]

Or what about this.  Did Mr. Emerson steal an idea from Victorinox?

http://www.emersonknives.com/ekEmersonShow.php

Scroll down for Custom CQC6 with tweezers.

Now that is funny!!         I think Mr. Emerson owes Victorinox one quid because he used tweezers on two custom knives. Pay up Mr. Emerson!   

But is he stealing a design?  I realize its petty, but who is to say this won't be a feature on upcoming models, or maybe this was his idea of a multitool.  OHO blade, bottle opener, tweezers.

True...   

[David Bowen]

Wow so much talk about this subject and I don't know where to start. I wanted to make a public notice to John and other folks that I was wrong and I had a change of heart. Maybe I should have kept my mouth closed and started a PM instead of a thread. We always get so heated in discussion and someone is always going to get mad or hurt and we lock and thread and that's it.

[Mike, Lord of the Spammers!]

I think it's gone pretty well so far David

[DaveK]

Nothing wrong with an exchange of opinions. For people like myself who see both sides of the argument (i.e. Peter Atwood's hard work v the right free trade in full swing), it is an interesting subject.

[Nikos]

Yup, most civilized thread on this subject.

I'd just like to point this out again: regardless of whether there is a patent (infringment) or not or MK7 targets a different group of buyers, Peter's tools surely predated the MK7 line. Given their obvious similarity, they could at least have acknowledged mr. Atwood as a source of inspiration (the least).

[zeno]

Guys, instead of giving any opinion on this from a "what should be right in the world" view, I am going to try and help everyone understand patents and the patent process.  I am the attorney for a company that has patented tools in more than one country, had patents infringed upon, and has received limited licenses to use tools patented by others in other countries.  In fact, I just filed a U.S. Provisional Patent for a process (not tool or product) last week.  This will be basic but it should help.

First, having a patent in one country does not necessarily protect you in another country.  It all depends upon how quickly you apply for a patent in another country after receiving a patent in the first.  There are also time limits on how long you have to do this or you wave any protection.

Second, just because you have a patent on something does not mean that the patent office won't give someone else a patent on a very similar product.  I have personally experienced this when company copied a tool that we had a patent on and made slight changes to the product and received a patent.  To make things worse, they don't even use the tool that they patented, but instead are using ours.  Basically, they got the patent so that could threaten every other competitor out there to stop what they were doing while having some illusory, but potentially credible argument that they were not infringing on ours if we sue them.  When patenting something all "prior art" is listed on the patent application.  Therefore, our tool was listed in the competitors patent as well as anything that was created before it.  The applicant then provides that "special something" that makes their product/tool different or better.  Think of it as someone patenting a wheelbarrow.  The prior art that may have its own patent would have been the wheel.  Then a rolling box.  Then a rolling box with four wheels.  And finally a wheel barrow that has one wheel differently shaped box and handles.  It is not that hard to change something significantly enough that is has improved or changed the original product, tool, or process.

It is up to the patent office to approve or deny a patent.  If someone has a problem with this they can challenge the new patent and ask for the patent office to review the new patent again to see if it was improperly approved.  The cost of that is about $80k for costs and attorneys' fees with no guarantee that the patent that was provided will be found void.  The other route is to file suit for patent infringement with a cost of about $250,000, at least two years of litigation, and no guarantee of the outcome.  While these costs can very, it is not cheap and takes a lot of time and many experts.  Also, your damages are calculated based upon the business that you lost and how you were damaged.  This is very important and will be the only thing that I will relate directly to Peter's awesome work and those who may or may not be infringing on it, so please read this carefully.  If Peter has a patent on a tool and wins a case he will have to show his damages.  His damages would be calculated in very large part by taking the number of the item that he could have sold if the competitor wasn't selling them and comparing that number to what he actually sold.  Here is the kicker, Peter sales out of everything he ever makes in minutes because he makes small numbers of items that are considered art as much as tools.  He has nothing in stock that is not selling due to infringement.  Therefore, no damages.  If he was a manufacturer and had thousands of a patented item that didn't sell due to someone selling the same thing it would be different.  The ability to potentially have a court make a company stop producing something and the limited damages to be recovered is far outweighed by the cost of litigation.

Third, something can not be patented if it is already out there in the stream of business.  If a process, tool, product, etc. is patented and someone makes, uses, or sales, something similar but it was already out there prior to the beginning of a patent process it is an absolute defense to a claim of patent infringement.  The lesson to be learned here is to ask for a provisional patent which cost about $5000 if you are worried that something you created is going to be stolen.  At that point someone will go through every patent that might be like yours to make sure that what you created doesn't already exist.  If it does, you are actually the one infringing on someone else's patent.  If it doesn't you have a year to follow through with the full patent application.

The bottom line is this:
If you don't protect it, you can complain but that is it.
Just because something is similar doesn't mean that it is the same.
Even if you do patent something, protecting your patent is costly and time consuming.

I hope that this was helpful.

[Mr. Whippy]

Very interesting!

Thanks!

[DaveK]

Very helpful - thanks Zeno.

Does the patent / infringement claiming process vary much from country to country do you know?

[Mr. Whippy]

Very helpful - thanks Zeno.

Does the patent / infringement claiming process vary much from country to country do you know?

I think so...

Chinese Patent Infringement Department mail bin:

[zeno]

Very helpful - thanks Zeno.

Does the patent / infringement claiming process vary much from country to country do you know?

DaveK:
I have not ever had to deal with making a claim in another country, but I would think that for larger international companies the claims could be made in more than one jurisdiction as the infringement would impact world wide sales if it was a product.  If it is something specific to a region or country it would differ based upon their laws and there could be a large variance in penalties, enforcement, and how claims are made.

[RaptorMan]

Sideclip anyone?

[Gadget Guy]

Wow so much talk about this subject and I don't know where to start. I wanted to make a public notice to John and other folks that I was wrong and I had a change of heart. Maybe I should have kept my mouth closed and started a PM instead of a thread. We always get so heated in discussion and someone is always going to get mad or hurt and we lock and thread and that's it.

Sorry David, I should have just responded to your original post. Thanks for having a little more understanding on where I'm coming from. I never said I was right (at least I don't think so  ) but this is simply the way I feel about the subject. Anyway, thanks for your post!   

[David Bowen]

Hey, I support Peter 110%! I wish he could just add a scraper like the piranha has to his tools. Is there a tool with a flat surface wide enough for a scraper or am I missing something? Peter has a "creature series" he is working on and the first one is called the LockNut Monster LOL I think it's so darn cool looking!

[ryan1835]

that would be even more useful if the wrench end was at a slight angle 

[jekostas]

I dunno, perhaps the whole PocketToolX thing will help Atwood in the end.  Gateway tool and all. 

[David Bowen]

It could, maybe they could feed off each other for ideas or something. Peter has more freedom to come up with new stuff and produce in smaller quantities. Course, there is this very awesome gold TiNi Piranha...

[David Bowen]

I tried for about an hour on google to try and find a Peter Atwood patent but was unable to find one. Sucks too cause I was hoping to see if there was indeed one.

[Gadget Guy]

Who cares about a patent, right is right and wrong is wrong. Peter told me he had a patent, maybe he just tells people that.