Rick Hinderer sent Cease and Desist to Youtuber for saying the steel was soft in his knife?

[OilMan]

Anyone see where Rick Hinderer/Hinderer Knives sent a cease and desist to a Youtuber for saying his steel was soft in the Hinderer Knife he had tested? Pics stolen from a post on FB..

 

[Yo Mama]

More ig drama, background someone tested a Hinderer and allegedly was low rc. One out of 12 blades was so, the rest were normal.

I'm posting the lawer's letter, small print sorry but it's only posted on ig.

Some good points imo from Hinderer, the rc testing gotcha stuff just never seemed right to me, what are your thoughts bladeforums on this?

 

[ferider]

First time I see documented that Rick uses Peters Heat Treat. Thanks for that ( Blues , we once wondered ....).

 

[Blues]

First time I see documented that Rick uses Peters Heat Treat. Thanks for that ( Blues , we once wondered ....).

If I remember correctly, Demko also uses Peters for the knives built in their shop.

 

[jlauffer]

I know it's not a linear scale, but if the published range is 59-61, why would anyone make a big deal about 58.6?

 

[shane45-1911]

EDIT - Threads merged by mod, nothing to see here now.

 

[shane45-1911]

I know it's not a linear scale, but if the published range is 59-61, why would anyone make a big deal about 58.6?

Because some people are just that anal.

 

[Yo Mama]

Anyone see where Rick Hinderer/Hinderer Knives sent a cease and desist to a Youtuber for saying his steel was soft in the Hinderer Knife he had tested? Pics stolen from a post on FB..

We posted same time!

 

[Insipid Moniker]

After the debacle about Lionsteel's M390 I'm not surprised. Independent testing is great, but professional tools in the hands of amateurs and people with large audiences wildly extrapolating from limited data that they have little to no idea how to interpret can both lead to far more misinformation than no testing at all.

We already see plenty of members here pushing data that's very questionable and using the words of YouTubers to prop up their own false expertise, often while attempting to cast doubt on proper scientific testing like the work Larrin is doing.

I don't know that this is the best way to handle it, but some company going this route was pretty much inevitable and I certainly don't outright condemn Hinderer for going this direction, though, again, I'm unsure it was the best way to go about it.

 

[Chuck_Nunface]

First time I've read the whole complaint. While I think it's petty of RHK to threaten litigation, it does introduce some truths: 1. Social media is a powerful tool and the influence of the upstart entrepreneur should not be underestimated; and 2. actions have consequences and will undoubtedly play out negatively for both participants - Mr. Kim may have bit off a bit more than he can chew and RHK may suffer a further drop in reputation based on the response.

Ultimately, we're a fickle bunch, and will likely not care in a year.

 

[Owen K.]

That transparent guy is on a podcast and just whines and moans about everything all the time. I'm not at all suprised he's trying to make drama. Also, Hinderer easily could have just ignored him not sure why he chose this course of action.

 

[3D Anvil]

This makes Hinderer look like an ahole, IMO-- and not because of the slightly subpar heat treat. The proper response would have been, "hmm, looks like one of 12 knives you tested was very marginally below our standard. Thanks for bringing it to our attention." Instead, he brings in the lawyers to try to intimidate this guy?

Brian -- the Transparent Knives guy -- is a Korean American knife maker/modder who does some amazing work. He appeared on a live Youtube feed with the USA Blades guy to discuss this. Hinderer could have appeared with them to address it, but instead he stayed in the comments making snarky comments, while many of his fanboys made really offensive anti-Asian comments.

Brian's beef is really with the majority of production knife makers -- not just Hinderer. He thinks that they're too conservative in their heat treats and are wasting the potential of high-end steels like M390/20cv by running it at 59-61 instead of around 63-64 hrc. Agree or disagree, but he's entitled to his opinion. Obviously a lot of folks agree, because in his recent lottery for AD20.5 reblades (Magnacut at 64 hrc) , he had around 250 entries for 20 available slots.

 

[3D Anvil]

After the debacle about Lionsteel's M390 I'm not surprised. Independent testing is great, but professional tools in the hands of amateurs and people with large audiences wildly extrapolating from limited data that they have little to no idea how to interpret can both lead to far more misinformation than no testing at all.

Brian isn't an amateur. He makes his living by making knives and blades.

 

[Blues]

Well, I'll just say that both Roland and I know from firsthand experience that knives that have been reworked / reground can definitely have issues subsequently, even when done by knowledgeable folks. It's often revealed during attempts to sharpen. So, I don't doubt that this could very well have entered into the equation addressed by the law firm.

Beyond that, I will not speculate.

 

[SimplyMinded]

Would the youtuber have been able to detect a slightly low heat treat just by using the knife and without scientific testing? Pretty unlikely. That being said, Hinderer has done themselves no favors with the lawsuit. I'd never heard of this guy or any of this and now because of this the dude and the entire mess get free publicity. Just send the man a knife you know is within stated specs and consider that as "100% warranty fulfillment", drop the case and hopefully it goes away before you've drawn any more attention to it. Just my opinion.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

Brian isn't an amateur. He makes his living by making knives and blades.

And does he have any professional qualifications at testing or interpreting data? Because if the lawsuit has correctly cited his alleged statements he vastly overstated what he could possibly have learned from the testing he did, which is something only an amateur would do.

 

[Yo Mama]

After the debacle about Lionsteel's M390 I'm not surprised. Independent testing is great, but professional tools in the hands of amateurs and people with large audiences wildly extrapolating from limited data that they have little to no idea how to interpret can both lead to far more misinformation than no testing at all.

We already see plenty of members here pushing data that's very questionable and using the words of YouTubers to prop up their own false expertise, often while attempting to cast doubt on proper scientific testing like the work Larrin is doing.

I don't know that this is the best way to handle it, but some company going this route was pretty much inevitable and I certainly don't outright condemn Hinderer for going this direction, though, again, I'm unsure it was the best way to go about it.

I 100 percent agree!

 

[DayofReckoning]

One of the highest regarded knife makers in the business goes with the nuclear option and has a set of lawyers type up a 30 page temper tamp trum, all because a tiny little Instagram account with less than 7,000 subscribers made a negative comment about their steel.

If that's the case, then how many dozens, hundreds of people right here on Bladeforums could be open to a similar lawsuit for results of blade testing that's been posted here that might not exactly fall in line with the manufacturers specs?

Maybe Hinderer is in the right here. Or then again, maybe there is some truth to transparentknives claims and it stuck a nerve. I don't know.

But the situation reminds me of when Tony Marfione snapped and threatened to sue someone over a random comment suggesting he copied the Natrix. The child like "I'll sue you" type reactions seem to suggest there could be some truth to it.

I believe cases like these can easily become a slippery slope.

 

[The Grendels]

After the debacle about Lionsteel's M390 I'm not surprised. Independent testing is great, but professional tools in the hands of amateurs and people with large audiences wildly extrapolating from limited data that they have little to no idea how to interpret can both lead to far more misinformation than no testing at all.

We already see plenty of members here pushing data that's very questionable and using the words of YouTubers to prop up their own false expertise, often while attempting to cast doubt on proper scientific testing like the work Larrin is doing.

I don't know that this is the best way to handle it, but some company going this route was pretty much inevitable and I certainly don't outright condemn Hinderer for going this direction, though, again, I'm unsure it was the best way to go about it.

I remember seeing a knife review recently, where the guy pointed out that the weight of a knife was different from the product description. He was using a cheap-ass digital scale and my first thought was wondering if he'd even bothered to properly calibrate it.

 

[3D Anvil]

And does he have any professional qualifications at testing or interpreting data? Because if the lawsuit has correctly cited his alleged statements he vastly overstated what he could possibly have learned from the testing he did, which is something only an amateur would do.

I mean, he has an hrc tester that he uses professionally, so I'd say yes. This stuff isn't rocket science. You calibrate the machine and follow the instructions.