Not round holes

[Simple Man]

"The Spyderco hole is a rotating mechanical assembly of one part."

 

[gooeytek]

Doesn't make a difference to me, round, oval, teardrop, it's all good. As long as it opens, it's a non-issue.

 

[gytheran]

Either works for me just fine.

 

[Maddogg774]

I like the Strider opening hole almost as much as Spyderco's :thumbup:

I agree. I also love the hole on my hossom. It feels more secure to open than the spyderhole. Maybe just my geometry.

 

[gdwtvb]

Pretty sure that spyderco invented the round hole as an new way to one hand open knives. There was some type of lawsuit between Spyderco and Benchmade at one point. The resolution details haven't been made public, but benchmade still uses a round hole in some of their models. Pretty sure that Spyderco owns the patent that defines the round hole in a blade as an opening method. IMHO it is the single best way to make a one hand opening knife.

Griz

 

[aquaman67]

I think the oval holed Griptilians look better. I have 3, two full size and one mini.

 

[tiguy7]

I don't like the oval hole on the Boye knives because my thumb has to travel the length of the slot and get pinched before the blade moves. The AFCK gets flicked. I don't bother with the thumb hole.
I also flick my Southard because the thumb hole is small and the detent is strong.View attachment 413930

 

[joker42179]

I actually prefer the Strider oval to the round Spyderhole

 

[A Justice]

Pretty sure that spyderco invented the round hole as an new way to one hand open knives. There was some type of lawsuit between Spyderco and Benchmade at one point. The resolution details haven't been made public, but benchmade still uses a round hole in some of their models. Pretty sure that Spyderco owns the patent that defines the round hole in a blade as an opening method. IMHO it is the single best way to make a one hand opening knife.

Griz

I have heard a few stories about this. The most pervasive is that Spyderco was only able to claim infringement if the holes were the same size.

I am familiar with patent law and the patent process, and the opening hole is definitely an improvement that qualifies for patent protection, but personally I think it's borderline cherry picking. Like others have pointed out, many simple features are in the public domain in knives, and a hole is about as simple as it gets (anybody with a drill press can add one to a blade). Does anybody know when their patent protection expires?

 

[bpeezer]

I have heard a few stories about this. The most pervasive is that Spyderco was only able to claim infringement if the holes were the same size.

I am familiar with patent law and the patent process, and the opening hole is definitely an improvement that qualifies for patent protection, but personally I think it's borderline cherry picking. Like others have pointed out, many simple features are in the public domain in knives, and a hole is about as simple as it gets (anybody with a drill press can add one to a blade). Does anybody know when their patent protection expires?

I believe the hole is trademarked, not patented.

 

[K.O.D.]

I like both the spydie hole and the stridie hole equally.

 

[Stays Sharp]

They were the first to do many things and with the Spyderhole, they should get to keep it. Beyond legalities it really boils down to a respect thing with other manufacturers like Comeuppance already said, and quite well. Sal is of course a prominent figure in the knife community and doesn't step on others' toes himself. With BM, Sal and Les came to an agreement supposedly, details I don't know. You won't see Spyderco use the axis lock when its patent expires though, they recognize it as BM's lock (source:Sal's post) and they should keep it. Unlike BM who doesn't even give credit to others' work like calling the RIL the "monolock".

I had a SNG with the hole and it worked well enough. I also had an AFCK that I regret selling, awesome knife- looks like a Spyderco though.

The most pervasive is that Spyderco was only able to claim infringement if the holes were the same size.

I didn't know that. Still a big win if its true... Any smaller and it does get too cramped and harder to deploy, any bigger and the hole just gets ridiculous. Knife-holes I'm talking about. :thumbup:

 

[Bob W]

I have no trouble using an oval or round hole. In fact I rather like the old Paragon knives with an oval indent. Conversely some of the round holes are a bit awkward because they're so large.

 

[JDunn709]

Really? I mean, that is great that you like them! Whatever works is cool, but can you explain why? When I press a non round hole with my thumb and twist it, the pad of my thumb kinda pinches and has to rub against the hole in a way that isn't painful, but is really noticeable and weird.

I do prefer the round Spyderco hole but I do like the Strider style too, which offers other advantages such as a slimmer profile when closed.

I have no problem opening knives with either style hole.

 

[A Justice]

I believe the hole is trademarked, not patented.

That makes more sense for Spyderco's use of it (it's an effective opening mechanism, but it has definitely become more of a brand symbol that just a way to open a knife). That presents a whole other set of problems, protections, and considerations. I actually think the argument for trademarking a hole is worse than the argument for patenting a hole as an improved opening mechanism. I would have loved to have been present at those proceedings.

I didn't know that. Still a big win if its true... Any smaller and it does get too cramped and harder to deploy, any bigger and the hole just gets ridiculous. Knife-holes I'm talking about. :thumbup:

I first heard it from a guy that owned the Benchmade knife design the proceedings were over. Benchmade was able to keep producing the model, but discontinued it later because it poses a unique marketing problem. When you're in dispute with other companies that are well liked, it's always going to have an effect on your brand perception. It was a calculated move based on business, not as much a nod to respect. The difference in the dimensions were very small according to him.

 

[Stays Sharp]

I first heard it from a guy that owned the Benchmade knife design the proceedings were over. Benchmade was able to keep producing the model, but discontinued it later because it poses a unique marketing problem. When you're in dispute with other companies that are well liked, it's always going to have an effect on your brand perception. It was a calculated move based on business, not as much a nod to respect. The difference in the dimensions were very small according to him.

So they learned a lesson there to respect another brand's unique feature because it bit them back. Had they respected it like all the other companies in the first place, that respect would have been more genuine and could have saved them time from having to calculate moves and learning a lesson in doing business.

 

[lambertiana]

I like the round hole on my Spydercos, but the opening hole on my Buck Mayo, Waimea, and Vantage work just fine for me, too. The only ones I don't like are the holes with weird angles, long thin sections, etc.

 

[fzla226]

Yep the round hole is a trademark of spyderco. If you see another company using it, they either are licensed to do so, are doing it illegally or dont know they should not be doing it. I think the reason you dont see the round hole on the byrd knives is because they wanted a brand of entry level knives with their own identity. If they used the round hole they might as well call it a spyderco. But I also have to assume they want to reserve spyderco name for mid to high level knives.

kind of a b.s. move to try to trademark something that's over 20 years old at this point.

 

[Quillan]

Let them all use round holes. That way, Spyderco has all their competitors trumpeting the effectiveness and elegance of their original design. Go ahead, Benchmade...be an willing shill for the simple brilliance of Spyderco genius.

Afetr all, isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery?

 

[The Mastiff]

kind of a b.s. move to try to trademark something that's over 20 years old at this point.

Why? Because you think so?

You are aware that Spyderco began using it back in the 80's. That's more than twenty years ago. In addition do you know if they are currently doing it, or did it long ago, and when?

Teach us something instead of just trolling .