- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 1,437
I've always wondered where the negative sentiment of Microtech/Marfione [M/M] originated from...
Thanks to you, it finally makes sense.
The Marfione family seems dysfunctional, to say the least
Do you happen to own any M/M products? I've owned a handful of them, they've all been of excellent quality; but their apathy towards customers in terms of warranties have pushed me away from them (sold off all my Microtechs).
If you were to teach a law classroom, would you use this instance as a case study?
You should dedicate a thread and illuminate us laypeople about the legal quarrels occurring in the knife industry.
Serious thanks to your commitment in compiling and delivering such an enlightening, lengthy, detailed post.
Thank you for the kind words.
I don’t own any Microtech knives, and I don’t plan on buying any, mainly because of the owner, but also things like the screws and the warranty.
If I was a law prof, the Microtech/KAI thing would probably be most relevant as an example of how you analyze a situation as corporate counsel. This is entirely speculative, but I think there’s a high likelihood that KAI didn’t go after Microtech for patent infringement because the downside simply outweighed the upside. I don’t think they’d have been able to recoup enough money from Microtech to make it worth risking their patent (since it’s pretty obvious that the Matrix was a ripoff of the 0777, Microtech would basically have to argue the patent was invalid in order to win). They were able to get M/M to stop selling the infringing models with the C&D letter, which is really the primary goal, so they likely decided that was good enough of a result.
On the other side of the suit, the bonkers statements that Marfione made trying to justify his actions are good example of what not to do. CEOs, particularly ones who spent a lifetime building their companies up from nothing, can be sensitive creatures. One of the worst parts of being in-house counsel is trying to rein in someone like that. I can almost guarantee that the reason Marfione’s 5-page statement about why he ripped off KAI’s design disappeared was because the lawyers told them to pull it. Marfione also seems to try to be a bully in litigation. KAI is the only sizable party they’ve sued, mostly it’s been insignificant retailers selling knockoff Microtech OTFs. The suit against Tony Sculimbrine reeked of bullying. Tony is a criminal defense attorney, and IIRC was transitioning from the public defender to private practice around that time, which meant he didn’t really have the financial resources or legal knowledge to mount much of a defense against a relatively well-funded corporate plaintiff. IP law is lightyears away from criminal practice, so he needed to hire counsel, which is the last thing you want to do when you’re trying to start your own practice. In the end, he retracted the post (although the retraction doesn’t really read like Tony, leading me to suspect it was largely influenced by Marfione and his attorneys), plus agreed to do 700 hours of pro bono legal work over a period of years. Significantly, large portion of that work was to go to AKTI, one of the main pro-knife lobbying groups. Of course, as a manufacturer of the most frequently targeted category of knives (OTFs and Autos), Microtech stands to benefit from any headway made by AKTI in overturning restrictive knife laws.
Bonus legal content: to expand on my point about KAI not wanting to push litigation because it could jeopardize their patent, I have a very strong suspicion that the same reason explains Spyderco’s reluctance to go after anyone for infringing on the “trademark Round Hole.” Spyderco’s Spydie Hole was originally covered by a patent, which is only granted for “useful” inventions. When it lapsed, they were somehow granted a trademark, although they only apply to non-functional features. My theory is that Spyderco knows that the trademark’s validity is questionable, so it’s better for them to do licensing agreements with companies like Benchmade, rather than trying to litigate the issue and forcing Benchmade to attack the validity of the trademark. They can get the result they want (maintaining the trademark and controlling the use of the hole) without jeopardizing their ability to keep the mark.
Hey, O OrangeBlueOrangeBlue , way to back up your statements! So much information these days, even here, is just parroted from some other source and it winds up being rumor and hearsay. Nicely done. We live in a time where there seems to be a lot more misinformation than information, and it seems that there is always someone sitting in front of their computer that "knows the guy" or situation that is being spoken of.... trust them... they are on the internet.
I hope all remember here that they folks review knives only do it for a couple of reasons. First, mostly likely money. Second, most likely ego. I would bet that 99% of the people that post videos ( "hey... seriously... don't forget to subscribe/like/ring the bell since that's how I support this site" ) don't do it because they have nothing else better to do.
Really?? UNFN Boxing?? " ummm.....errrr.... well, this is a box. Seems like a nice box.... the knife came in this box. The box appears to be blue.... with some what I am going to call ummmmm..... errr..... "black" writing on it. Here is the barcode sticker. The box as we are calling it, is in pretty good shape, and the knife appears to fit well inside it".
Add 15 more minutes of stumbling around, rolling the knife over in the hand, flicking he mechanism discussing how fast it "deploys", showing it compared to the other knives you own, and that is all you seem to get. Better than nothing, but not much. And of course, all now are experts. If they call the company and tell them they are reviewing one of the company's knives for their YouTube channel, no doubt someone will take the call in this cancellation culture we have.
I have seen this somewhere online; the guy has a question about how a knife opens (excuse me, deploys) and about wear surfaces on the frame and no engineer/designer will take his call. He calls back the next day, and those same busy professionals don't take his call. Don't they know he is Rock Survivalman (his internet name, no doubt) from Dime Box, Texas?
The posting continues with "I tried to contact the company on more than one occasion to discuss this with them, but they refused to respond. Makes me wonder about their customer service after the sale. What if I needed them in a knife emergency and they weren't there for me?"
No doubt some of the guys do a really good job, and if you have ever made a video, you have an ideal how long it takes just to make 10 minutes. (I do them as part of my commercial real estate inspection reports). If I wasn't getting paid for it, I wouldn't do it. Then of course, EVERYONE is a critic once you have gone live and posted it for viewing. And although they haven't posted a video on their own, they are grand critics. Critical comments range from they think you are an idiot, I don't like his accent, I love my XXXX so he must have done something wrong, I didn't like his/her testing methods, and on and on. NOW... now they have an opinion!
So I am back to my original premise. If there are more than a video or two from someone, no doubt in my mind they are either trying to make money or hoping to make money from their hobby. Even if they waive the flag of "I paid for this myself and didn't receive anything from XXXX" I think we should take all of them with a grain or three of salt. Even without sponsorship, they receive a (although tiny) payment every time an ad runs.
Robert
A lawyer presenting actual evidence to back up an argument, what is the world coming to? The information is out there, but it takes actually wanting to find it. A lot of people aren’t willing to go down the rabbit hole of obscure legal issues, but that’s sort of my job.
Also, I highly doubt any knife reviewers are making enough to earn a living. Shabazz is probably the most successful, and he’s got a day job as a research scientist. As he tells it, his YouTube and Patreon combine to make enough to keep the channel going, primarily by funding new stuff to review. He raffles off review samples provided by manufacturers with the proceeds going to his local women’s shelters, so no money made there.
I think most of the prominent reviewers do it because they legitimately love talking about knives and gear.