Spydiebenza 25

Heres an email from Peter from spyderco legal department:
We registered round hole as a trademark as used on folding knives. We're working on a world-wide registration program for all of our marks, but costs and bureaucracy slow things down. At this time, the round hole is registered in the US, and "claimed" in the rest of the world. Most trademarks go claimed but un-registered; holder's pursuing registration to improve the holder's rights. Since Spyderco developed a utility patent on the blade depression/though depression, the hole was obviously functional. This patent has expired; hence we have little to say about the functionality of other's opening holes. However, the USPTO made a ruling that even if an object has functionality (in fact/de facto) it could still have a unique recognizable shape. This argument prevailed (we were a significant early-on policy solidifying case), and we registered the round hole along with the "Spyderco, Bug, byrd, and Comet", amongst others. Hence the “round” of the hole is what we endeavor to maintain as a trademark representation of Spyderco. You can now see why the confusion over the internet. However, you’ve come to the right place to have the discussion; I’ve managed the IP portfolio since the early 90’s.



Regarding use: Since the round hole represents us as a mark, we have to place some very tough restrictions on its’ use, like quality standards, etc., similar to how McDonalds/Wendy’s/Subway etc. control their franchisee’s. We’ve never had the interest in being the controlling type, so it is not in our business model to do so. We do license custom makers, because they are willing to submit (in theory at least) to a nearly unlimited bar of excellence to use the representation. We also limit the use to 50 pieces per year, for an annual fee of $50. Except on very high-end custom pieces, it is a fairly high royalty. In addition to the afore stuff, we now require mention anytime a photo of a product bearing the mark is published. However, having said all of that, we do not have anything to say about any other shape except the Comet. Sal’s patent expired a number of years ago, and in keeping with US patent law, we make no mention of rights to a “depression/through depression” for the use of one-hand opening of a knife. The market exploded with one-hand openers as the patent neared expiration. We’ve learned over the years, there are actually a variety of very useful opening hole shapes depending on the use of the blade. Spyderco restricted itself to the “round” primarily for identification/trademark purposes.



What we are licensing is the trademark that represents Spyderco.
 
I see nothing ridiculous or wrong at all about Spyderco trademarking the round hole for OHO.

Jim
 
It's not the hole per se that compromises the structural integrity of the blade steel, but more the quality of the drilling that may disturb and usually the common culprit to a broken blade.

I think edge geometry is the biggest factor when considering the blade with the opening mechanism usually an after thought. At least on paper, am I right?
 
I think its cool and to each their own. If it helps you deploy your knife more effectively then so be it and Its one of the most interesting mods i have seen so far. not something I was aware could be commissioned to have done so thank you for sharing. It looks to be well executed.
 
Hackenslash said:
Also the thumb stud hole then has a hardened stud press-fitted into it. That’s a fairly unique stress. I’ve seen more blades develop a crack at the stud than a crack at a Spydiehole.
Click to expand...

It happens to CRKs as well. I've seen several reports of it, especially on the Sebenza 25/Inkosi.
I snagged this photo from the Facebook CRK Fanpage. You can see the crack going towards the jimping. The crack always appears in this spot and CRK has replaced them under warranty.

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 8.11.35 AM.png
 
valknut said:
Heres an email from Peter from spyderco legal department:
We registered round hole as a trademark as used on folding knives. We're working on a world-wide registration program for all of our marks, but costs and bureaucracy slow things down. At this time, the round hole is registered in the US, and "claimed" in the rest of the world. Most trademarks go claimed but un-registered; holder's pursuing registration to improve the holder's rights. Since Spyderco developed a utility patent on the blade depression/though depression, the hole was obviously functional. This patent has expired; hence we have little to say about the functionality of other's opening holes. However, the USPTO made a ruling that even if an object has functionality (in fact/de facto) it could still have a unique recognizable shape. This argument prevailed (we were a significant early-on policy solidifying case), and we registered the round hole along with the "Spyderco, Bug, byrd, and Comet", amongst others. Hence the “round” of the hole is what we endeavor to maintain as a trademark representation of Spyderco. You can now see why the confusion over the internet. However, you’ve come to the right place to have the discussion; I’ve managed the IP portfolio since the early 90’s.



Regarding use: Since the round hole represents us as a mark, we have to place some very tough restrictions on its’ use, like quality standards, etc., similar to how McDonalds/Wendy’s/Subway etc. control their franchisee’s. We’ve never had the interest in being the controlling type, so it is not in our business model to do so. We do license custom makers, because they are willing to submit (in theory at least) to a nearly unlimited bar of excellence to use the representation. We also limit the use to 50 pieces per year, for an annual fee of $50. Except on very high-end custom pieces, it is a fairly high royalty. In addition to the afore stuff, we now require mention anytime a photo of a product bearing the mark is published. However, having said all of that, we do not have anything to say about any other shape except the Comet. Sal’s patent expired a number of years ago, and in keeping with US patent law, we make no mention of rights to a “depression/through depression” for the use of one-hand opening of a knife. The market exploded with one-hand openers as the patent neared expiration. We’ve learned over the years, there are actually a variety of very useful opening hole shapes depending on the use of the blade. Spyderco restricted itself to the “round” primarily for identification/trademark purposes.



What we are licensing is the trademark that represents Spyderco.
Click to expand...

What I would be really interested in is whether the "Round Hole" mark would hold up to something like Andrew Demko's "engagement ring" patent. The patent is for what is basically a Spydiehole with an extended edge. It's been used on at least a few Cold Steel knives (Golden Eye, Grik, Khan).
 
1CB2376F-64EC-4A64-87E3-E0D23FADFFAA.jpeg P patrickguignot

I love the hole mod. Ive always wanted to do that. Im not afraid of modding CRK’s myself.
As for weakening the knife...i wouldnt worry about it. If it breaks there, we are doing something we shouldnt be doing with a knife. Lol.
Anyways, congrats!! Looks awesome!!

Edit: Just re-read my post, i meant “As for myself, Im not afraid of modding CRK’s”
It sounded like i did the work myself, that is not so. I had the talented man, Josh from REK perform my mods for me. Thanks Josh @razor-edge-knives
 
Last edited:
These both look even nicer in person... the holes allow you to admire the Damascus even when closed :)

Sharp & Fiery said:
View attachment 1098854 P patrickguignot

I love the hole mod. Ive always wanted to do that. Im not afraid of modding CRK’s myself.
As for weakening the knife...i wouldnt worry about it. If it breaks there, we are doing something we shouldnt be doing with a knife. Lol.
Anyways, congrats!! Looks awesome!!

Edit: Just re-read my post, i meant “As for myself, Im not afraid of modding CRK’s”
It sounded like i did the work myself, that is not so. I had the talented man, Josh from REK perform my mods for me. Thanks Josh @razor-edge-knives
Click to expand...
 
I quite like the look of the CRK blade hole version. I dont do thumb studs and prefer the hole in the Spyderco blades.
CRK fans tend to get defensive about these ''hybrids' but they dont need to. The CRKs are beautiful quality knives in their own right. The occasional Spyderco hole doesnt detract from that. Besides the OP can do with his knife as he wants.

As much as I like the hole in the blade, I dont agree wth the OPs critque of the Spyderco trademark nor do I believe, that his comparison with the hole and the invention of the wheel holds water ... and thats me being diplomatic.

As for those thinking this is a '15-20 minute job with a Dremel,' thats a laughable notion. Paying a pro to do this mod is fully justified. If you think the price is too steep, dont do the mod.

Sharp & Fiery said:
View attachment 1098854 P patrickguignot

I love the hole mod. Ive always wanted to do that. Im not afraid of modding CRK’s myself.
As for weakening the knife...i wouldnt worry about it. If it breaks there, we are doing something we shouldnt be doing with a knife. Lol.
Anyways, congrats!! Looks awesome!!

Edit: Just re-read my post, i meant “As for myself, Im not afraid of modding CRK’s”
It sounded like i did the work myself, that is not so. I had the talented man, Josh from REK perform my mods for me. Thanks Josh @razor-edge-knives
Click to expand...
As before, its your knife and you can do with it as you choose. Personally, I dont care for that half scallopped look of the handle scale on the top knife ... and when I say I dont care for it, thats me being diplomatic again.
Speaking in general terms; Im all for mods but just because you can do it or have it done, doesnt always mean you should.
 
Last edited:
Sharp & Fiery said:
As far as my limited knowledge of the spydie trademark is that it is the hole at an exact size.
Also, near the beggining of BM and Spydercos existence, a couple designers (the designer of the pika 2 and the AFAK?) actually pitched their idea for a knife shape to Spyderco. So those blades had the hole. Spyderco passed, thinking they wouldnt sell well, and BM picked up the designs. This was before the trademark Spyderco now holds.
So today, as long as the hole isnt the exact size as the trademark it is fair game.
Also, i know, for a fact, that you can license the spyderco hole. I have a good friend who holds a license to do so.
Trademarking a hole is absurd to me...its a hole. Same with blade shapes. There are only so many shapes and holes you can do.

If there is someone here who can correct any of this information, i am open to that. This is all just to my understanding.

Not trying to argue, just sharing what i have heard over the years.
Im not a BM fan (or a Spydie fan for that matter), although i do own a couple models from both companies.
But a blanket statement like "BM already stole the spydie hole" bothers me. To make a statement like that, you better be sure your information is correct.
No hard feelings at all...just having a discussion. :)
Click to expand...

BM had permission from Spyderco to use the hole 20 years or so ago. Just like cold steel had permission to use the Spydrco frn integral pocket clip in the early Voyager. However, I believe BM permission extended to only one model. Spyderco holes vary in size and tiny ones are in their fixed blades to protect their trademark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top