Woodcraft WoodRiver bench planes...are these any good? [Archive]

Tri Hoang

01-27-2009, 10:54 PM

I just saw the new planes being advertised on Woodcraft website but with little info available. Any good/bad experience with these? I am particularly interested in the #5.

According to Woodcraft website...

Modeled after the Bedrocks, Stanley Tool's very best line, WoodRiver planes feature the same heavy castings and fully machined frogs
This arrangement reduces chatter by supporting the blade and helps to reduce tear-out when planing highly figured wood
Lightly finished rosewood handles provide comfort and control
Most importantly, the tools require almost no tune-up prior to use
Soles and sides are machined flat and square within tightly held tolerances ensuring these planes are as close to ready to use as can be made
Usually, just a light touch up on the high-carbon Rc60-64 blades will enable you to go right to

Chuck Tringo

01-27-2009, 11:56 PM

These are pretty new, I believe WC just got them in this week or last, so I doubt that many have used them yet, but I'm quite intrigued also, they look good in the magazine, I need to take a trip and see them in person...just wish they made a jointer as well.

Dewey Torres

01-28-2009, 1:10 AM

Randy Klein

01-28-2009, 6:51 AM

Although I haven't tried one, the tote looks rather uncomfortable.

Chuck Tringo

01-28-2009, 6:58 AM

Not sure of the merit because it may be a bit like chevy telling you the avalanche is a great truck but woodcraft magazine has a tester that rated these planes as very good "for knock offs" and said WC pumped money into the plane body to make it solid and square which is very important in a hand plane. Currect issue with the Tansu on the front pg 17. They are also lining up a hanfd plane test against other models in a later issue.

exactly why I want to get a hold of one....not so sure how much merit I put into WoodCraft testing or reviewing one of its own products...not like I expect Burger King to come out and say try our new whopper, its not as good as a 1/4 pounder but buy it anyways :p

Tri Hoang

01-28-2009, 8:34 AM

The Albuquerque WC store here does not have any in stock yet...I guess I'll wait a little. If it turns out to be OK...it could be better for me to get one of these than to hunt for a used stanley bedrock on auction sites.

Richard Niemiec

01-28-2009, 11:03 AM

Huge debate going on over in Woodnet on this, worth reading.

Bill Keehn

01-28-2009, 11:27 AM

Why not just look for an actual bedrock at the flea market? You could probably get it for a third of what WC sells these for.

Mike Henderson

01-28-2009, 11:39 AM

Why not just look for an actual bedrock at the flea market? You could probably get it for a third of what WC sells these for.
The one big difference I see is that the new planes won't break. If you drop a bedrock (really, I suppose I should say, if it falls off your bench) the body won't break. Yep, I dropped a plane and the body cracked on the side by the mouth. Makes you want to cry.

I don't see any reason why the woodcraft planes won't be decent. The metal of the body is standard and low cost, and the machining is all cnc so it'll be accurate. If the iron is good and the tote comfortable, it should be an excellent user. If you had access to the costs to make an LN plane, I'm sure you'd find it was a small percentage of the selling price. LN doesn't sell that many planes so they have to make a good margin to support the business.

Mike

Tri Hoang

01-28-2009, 12:22 PM

Huge debate going on over in Woodnet on this, worth reading.

Thanks for the tip...I just finish reading that thread. Not much information on the planes but rather how similar it is to a LN and the whole lot more on the impact it may have on LN and LV.

I am not sure how big the market for hand planes is but these new planes (and the new premium Stanley planes) just segmented the market further.

lowell holmes

01-28-2009, 12:36 PM

If you find one at a flea market, maybe. Ebay prices are double the Woodcraft prices. I have three Bedrocks, and they cost much more than that 5 years ago.

I would probably go ahead and buy LN planes now. I have LN 4 1/2 that I consider to be a good value at $300.

Ken Werner

01-28-2009, 1:05 PM

David Keller NC

01-28-2009, 1:13 PM

"Why not just look for an actual bedrock at the flea market? You could probably get it for a third of what WC sells these for."

Because a true Stanley bedrock that's not damaged (i.e., no broken tote, no cracked front knob, mouth not cracked, correct blade, etc...) is going to cost several hundred dollars unless you run across someone that doesn't know what they have. A non-bedrock in similar shape is the one that goes for $50.

Douglas Brummett

01-28-2009, 1:39 PM

These planes are mfg in India (according to a WC employee that posted on woodnet), so I would lump them in the same boat as Groz, Anant, and the other imports from that area. Quality will certainly be lacking off the shelf. However with tuning the Groz planes I had worked just fine. One thing that looks better here is the blade thickness. The Groz blades were fairly thin. At any rate, I am sure they will make good users.

You won't find them in my shop though. I am trying, as much as I can justify, to buy American tools. So for now my planes are old iron and new Lie-Nielsen. Eventually I may get into making some as well. At any rate, I too find the cloning trend to be in poor taste here.

Rob Lee

01-28-2009, 2:40 PM

Hi -

Small correction - it's actually China, not India - at least - that's what the post reads now.
Cheers -

Rob

David Keller NC

01-28-2009, 3:50 PM

"Small correction - it's actually China, not India - at least - that's what the post reads now."

Even worse. With the exception of your company (mainly because Canada has a reasonably high standard of living, child labor laws and environmental regualtions), I won't have anything in my shop that isn't made in the US, if I can help it. Sadly, that seems to be increasingly impossible with sandpaper, portable power tools, and even jigs and fixtures.

Chuck Tringo

01-28-2009, 4:24 PM

You won't find them in my shop though. I am trying, as much as I can justify, to buy American tools. So for now my planes are old iron and new Lie-Nielsen. Eventually I may get into making some as well. At any rate, I too find the cloning trend to be in poor taste here.

I understand the buy US thing...but aren't most LN planes "clones" of old Stanleys...they even say so on their website (i.e. ...ours is based on the old Stanley #xx...) so I'm not sure how relevant that comment is. Personally I'm leaning towards more Veritas, LNs if I can get them used, but I love the Low Angle Smoother I got from Lee Valley, its a Bevel Up plane and I find it very easy to tune and use.

Mike Henderson

01-29-2009, 1:34 AM

If you buy a Bedrock or a LN, chances are excellent that the value of the plane will rise over time. That's my experience, again and again. All other issues aside [including my decision NOT to purchase an Asian knockoff product] I believe that the WC planes will go down in value over time. Just my opinion. I also would echo what Rob Lee and Derek Cohen have written in the woodnet discussion - that purchasing these planes supports a direction I find distasteful.
I haven't read the woodnet discussion so I don't know exactly what was said - so if anyone would like to amplify on the comments of Rob Lee and Derek Cohen I'd appreciate it.

I don't know what direction they're talking about, but having a wider variety of tools, at a variety of price points, does not seem like a bad market direction for the people who buy and use the tools.

Personally, I'm not very worried about a tool losing value over time. I don't buy tools as investments and I expect them to wear out and lose value. Essentially all my tools do that. I have a pretty complete selection of hand planes, but if I was just starting out in woodworking, I'd welcome the ability to purchase a new plane that worked well at a decent price. I still remember when I was just getting started in woodworking - I was appalled at the cost of tools and the number of tools I needed. It was very expensive to get started.

I welcome Woodcraft to the marketplace. If the combination of "quality" and price meets the needs of a significant segment of the woodworking market, they'll be successful. If not, the planes will fade from the market. That's what our economic system is all about.

Mike

Ken Werner

01-29-2009, 8:38 AM

Personally, I'm not very worried about a tool losing value over time. I don't buy tools as investments and I expect them to wear out and lose value. Essentially all my tools do that.

Mike

Hi Mike,

I think some tools do wear out over time - turning tools, chisels, plane blades, and certainly power tools, but others - planes are the main example -do not wear out in one woodworker's lifetime [unless they are wooden bodied.] I think that when one plunks down quite a bit for a high quality plane, it's reassuring to know that it will hold most of its value. I have to say also, that the good quality old Stanleys, the LV, and LN tools I've bought over the years have all held or gone up in value. This helps me justify my tool purchases.

I don't want to speak for Rob and Derek, they are far more articulate than I. But we each express an opinion with our purchases. I, for one, will support LV and LN, and not some manufacturer in the far east. I like Woodcraft, but I don't like what they're doing on this issue.

Rob Lee

01-29-2009, 8:44 AM

I haven't read the woodnet discussion so I don't know exactly what was said - so if anyone would like to amplify on the comments of Rob Lee ....(snip)

Hi Mike -

The basic thrust of what I was saying is that some of the products are blatant copies of original designs. In essence - it's theft ...pure and simple.

There are some that will do anything for a buck, and others who will support/enable that activity to save one....

The discussion has misguidedly centered around the bedrock planes - which aren't really the nub of the issue - and has caused much of the discussion to go off track.

Cheers -

Rob
(gone skiiing for the first time in 25 years....)

Phil Thien

01-29-2009, 8:58 AM

Cheers -

Rob
(gone skiiing for the first time in 25 years....)

Oh dear God be careful. :eek:

Douglas Brummett

01-29-2009, 9:24 AM

I understand the buy US thing...but aren't most LN planes "clones" of old Stanleys...they even say so on their website (i.e. ...ours is based on the old Stanley #xx...) so I'm not sure how relevant that comment is. Personally I'm leaning towards more Veritas, LNs if I can get them used, but I love the Low Angle Smoother I got from Lee Valley, its a Bevel Up plane and I find it very easy to tune and use.

Honestly cloning of items that are no longer under patent protection isn't my gripe. It is the cheapening of products, outsourcing of labor, and passing items off as "good quality". If there were no tool snobs these products would overrun the market and push the quality mfgs out of business. Then as time went on inflation and "manufacturing costs" would rise to increase profit on these. At some point in the future even these cheap immitation tools become expensive and we are left with a void where quality tools no longer exist. That is kind of the point where LN and LV stepped into the game back in the 80's (I know the Lee name has been around a bit longer).

The furniture market is a great example of this sort of practice. Now cheap furniture is expensive, but quality still isn't very good (Ashley, pottery barn, etc). In comes Ikea to save the day for cheap consumers. Of course the custom furniture realm has and will always be available to those who can afford $20K+ dining sets :rolleyes:

Derek Cohen

01-29-2009, 11:16 AM

Hi Mike (and all)

The issue is not about lower cost tools, or even that they are made in China. It is about design theft. Below is part of my first response on the WoodNet thread. Up until that point no one had mentioned the issue of ethics, only price ...

".. So many here are interested in a new, cheap tool, one that resembles a more expensive make. They are taken by the price, and ignore the moral and ethical issues involved.

The question is should not be whether these Wood River planes are a decent substitute, but whether they should be sold at all.

No one can claim ownership of designs in the public domain, that are no longer protected by patents, such as the classic Stanley tools (and a million power tools). However, the Wood River planes look like they come out of the same Chinese factory as the Grant planes, and where the designs produced and sold copy those created by companies such as LN and LV, then you must realise by purchasing the copies, you are both supporting design theft and undermining the efforts of companies that are willing to bear the costs of producing quality tools (such as LN and LV).

Are we to condone local companies selling what are clear design rip offs, such as the Bogg spokeshave, the LV Scraper, and the Grant version of the LV #95. Woodcraft, JWW and Tilgeatr (UK)must be fully aware that these tools are rip offs. So why do they buy in the stock to sell? Only if there are Buyers of this stock. "

Here are some images for consideration:

Japan WoodWorking spokeshave:

http://www.japanwoodworker.com/assets/images/product/JapanWoodworker/98.001.0.jpg

Does it remind you of this?

http://www.woodcraft.com/images/products/825003.jpg

Does this look familiar?

http://www.japanwoodworker.com/assets/images/product/JapanWoodworker/98.084.jpg

Or these?

http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/content/binary/Grant.jpg

Keep in mind that I am not coming down on re-builds of Bedrock Stanley planes. These are in the public domain. On the other hand, there is no place for those that copy the presentation and modifications to these planes, as in the deliberate attempt to align them with LN planes.

Buying such planes/tools supports the practice of theft.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Joel Goodman

01-29-2009, 11:28 AM

Derek -- well said. I couldn't agree more. A LN is based on the Bedrock but has a clear "look" of it's own -- no one would mistake one for the other. This is not an attempt to make another quality plane but rather a cheap counterfeit. These are rip offs just as sleazy as the fake "Rolex" watches. If I shopped at a store that carried these planes I would inform the manager that they have lost a customer.

Mike Henderson

01-29-2009, 11:33 AM

I wasn't even aware of the Grant planes, Derek. Regarding copying LN planes, or anybody's planes, if the design is not covered by patent, trademark or some other legal protection, anyone can copy it. Our economic system is set up to encourage this copying because it leads to lower prices which benefits the country as a whole. It also encourages the original manufacturer to increase their efficiency and limits their ability to extract "excessive" profits.

I understand your feeling of the unfairness of the system, but that is the system and it's worked well for all of us. All we can ask of the companies who sell us things is that they follow the laws we've established. Of course, if a potential customer feels that the company is within the law, but still unethical, they can refuse to purchase the product, which is why companies stress how "environmentally friendly" they are.

If the planes are "good", meaning that they work well and sell for an acceptable price, they will succeed in the market. If not, they won't.

In almost every market there are products at different price points. There are Fiats and Mercedes Benz cars, and the buyer gets to choose which one they want. Hand planes are no different.

Mike

Douglas Brummett

01-29-2009, 11:50 AM

Okay, can of worms opening up :rolleyes:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=108464&stc=1&d=1233247178

Does this imitation tool look just a bit like it is trying to borrow some market share from the innovative little driver pictured below???

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=108465&stc=1&d=1233247178

Should we boycott LV for selling the imitation tool? Should we write Rob a letter and let him know he is the demise of the Canadian economy? The whole debate is on shaky ground because we have invited these imitation products into our homes for decades, heck centuries if you are talking about hand plane clones ;)

Go ahead and take the high ground here, but do you go the cheap route elsewhere? I know I do. I bought my ridgid SCMS solely on price and reputation, throw out that it just stole a lot of design concept from another mfg.

Yep, these planes bug me. I was not happy to get a new woodcraft catalog and see them on the front. Gave me the distinc impression that the next step for woodcraft is to kick LN quality tools out of their stores. But what am I gonna do about it? Nuthin :rolleyes:

Joel Goodman

01-29-2009, 11:51 AM

Mike Henderson

01-29-2009, 12:01 PM

Mike I couldn't disagree more. The reason Chinese rip offs are cheap is because of excessively low wages, child labor, lack of environmental regulations, a totalitarian government, a misguided "free trade" policy and so forth. If we want to race to the bottom then let's support that and when we're all unemployed we'll wonder how it happened. All and especially the OP and Mike -- please forgive me for my rant!
All companies can do is follow the law. You could try to change the law, of course, but our economic system and the laws that guide it have worked very well. Whatever you replaced it with would have its own problems.

Mike

Joel Goodman

01-29-2009, 12:11 PM

Mike,

Companies and people can do more than follow the law. See the bottom of your post!

Mike Henderson

01-29-2009, 12:22 PM

Mike,

Companies and people can do more than follow the law. See the bottom of your post!
They can but they could put themselves at a competitive disadvantage. Companies operate in the market according to rules (laws) established by us. It's similar to a sports game. Each company has to fight hard for sales, while following the rules (laws). Occasionally, a company (like a sports competitor) may refuse to "use" the rules to their advantage, and may gain some market position from it. But in the majority of the market (as in sports), the company who exploits the rules to their advantage is the one who wins.

We cannot set rules (laws) and complain when the companies follow those rules. As individuals, we can expect more and refuse to buy from companies unless they support our pet cause, but we can't complain that they aren't following the rules.

If you expect more, you need to do things to change the rules so that all companies have to follow them and everyone competes on a level playing field.

Mike

David Keller NC

01-29-2009, 12:54 PM

James K Peterson

01-29-2009, 1:10 PM

I almost feel bad for asking, but are these planes junk? I would suspect they are low quality clones, but I didn't see anyone actually saying they had one.

Alan DuBoff

01-29-2009, 1:19 PM

All companies can do is follow the law. You could try to change the law, of course, but our economic system and the laws that guide it have worked very well. Whatever you replaced it with would have its own problems.

Mike
I don't believe this. Many companies go to China so they don't need to perform all the UL testing, or be able to dispose of hazardous materials inexpensively. They do that in China.

I was so disappointed recently to find that Carhartt products are not made in America anymore, at least not entirely.

Buying American made products is good for our country in general, and something I support. China can keep all of their crappy product and sell/use in China for all I care.

Jerome Hanby

01-29-2009, 1:29 PM

Buying American made products is good for our country in general, and something I support. China can keep all of their crappy product and sell/use in China for all I care.

I certainly agree with the sentiment, but it's kind of hard to live by. I heard of a web site on a morning radio show months ago. It was basically a buy American portal to direct you to various products still made in the USA. I was a little shocked by the small number of items. As I recall, a good percentage of the links were for custom made items like furniture. Only one source for blue jeans (Texas brand, made in NC:D).

David Bodkin

01-29-2009, 1:35 PM

I don't believe this. Many companies go to China so they don't need to perform all the UL testing, or be able to dispose of hazardous materials inexpensively. They do that in China.

Don't forget high business taxes and regulations/restrictions that are placed on companies in America.

Joel Goodman

01-29-2009, 1:43 PM

Amen to David Keller and Alan Duboff's posts!

Tri Hoang

01-29-2009, 2:13 PM

In the beginning I just wanted to get some "technical" input on the planes.

Let's suppose that these planes were made by an American company and sold at the same price point, would you take the same stand?

Despite ethical concerns about these planes, I think they will serve as a strong motivation for further innovations.

Up until this point, most of my new planes are LV...btw

Chuck Tringo

01-29-2009, 3:00 PM

In the end, you can make your choices and do the best that you can do...but as an earlier poster mentioned, thjis is easier said than done. The whole buy American Slogan was originally pushed by the same companies that have moved their product manufacturing overseas. I can guarantee that everyone here has products made in other countries where labor laws and wages are scant....you need only look in your wardrobe. If you choose to apply a standard to your tools because that is your passion, then so be it, but telling everyone who wants a cheaper alternative that they are causing the downfall of civilization because they buy some of these products is hypocrisy. Look in your pantry while your at it....if you are going to apply that standard then Im sure youll find that much of what you eat is produced in these countries, not to mention the toys you buy for your kids and grandkids. What car do you drive buy the way ? A chevy made in South America ? or a Toyota made in the USA ? The OP only asked if these were of decent quality, he didnt ask to be crucified for being an un-American nazi communist trying to bring about the downfall of civilization as we know it.../RANT OFF

Tri Hoang

01-29-2009, 3:29 PM

I just called woodcraft for more info on these. The cap iron and the iron would be 3mm thick (close to 1/8"). The #5 weights about 2.6Kg or 5.7lbs. ETA has been changed to end of Feb.

Alan DuBoff

01-29-2009, 9:49 PM

Only one source for blue jeans (Texas brand, made in NC:D).
Jerome,

This is not true for all of America, there are other alternatives.

I was told about this site in the past couple days, they do have made in America Carhartt. I don't know if it is NOS or not, but it seems that some is still made in America. I just bought 2 pair of Carhartt jeans and returned them today and got my money back. I'm ordering from this site online, or try to find the Gussets.

I put my money where my mouth is, I suggested the surplus store think about carrying Gussets also.

http://www.allamericanclothing.com/usa_carhartt.php

Also, these are made in America:

http://www.gussetclothing.com/

Joel Goodman

01-29-2009, 10:24 PM

Thanks for the website. I've been buying "American Apparel" T shirts made in Los Angeles. More pricey than the imports but for the 7 T shirts I own... They seem to last longer as well.

Dan Karachio

01-29-2009, 11:53 PM

Just my two cents, but I am really glad to hear made in America being important as is quality. Having those two together is a great thing. I think many people are starting to wake up to the idea that, gee, we actually need to make things in this country (other than credit default swaps and adjustable rate mortgages). I have another thread on starting a set of essential planes, and I am going to commit myself to either buying some of the fabulous new planes from American mfgs or used Stanleys thereby supporting US business men who do all the good work of finding these planes.

Now if I could be a little more sure of my job future I swear I would go out and by a nice US made truck!

Mike Henderson

01-30-2009, 12:00 AM

Mike - I remains to be seen whether the imitations Derek kindly provided examples of are truly legal. In addition to patents, there's such a thing as infringing on "trade dress", in other words, making your product such a blatant copy of someone else's that an individual could easily mistake one for another. Generally, the application of a different label (i.e., "Grant" instead of "Lie Nielsen") is not a sufficient defense against such infringement - closely copying the form and materials is enough.

Whether legal or not, there is an ethical consideration here that goes above and beyond the law. This is why I do not shop at Wal-Mart, and will go out of my way and spend extra money to avoid products that are sold at rock-bottom prices and made in Asia. It may well be (in fact, probably) that Asia will no longer be the cheap origination point - once social pressure forces environmental law enforcement, labor laws, and other restrictions that Western countries have had in place for many decades, it's likely that production will move to another low-cost, regulatory-free location, such as Africa.

But all that makes sense - corporations are not bound by ethics, only law. What I (and many others) find really disturbing is our fellow citizen's insistence on the lowest price possible, without regard to the circumstances. Wal-Mart is not the evil-doer, it's the thousands upon thousands that flock through the doors every day.
I'm not an attorney, but I'd think a suit based on "trade dress" would be tough to make if the brand is displayed prominently. There are legal ways to protect your design - a design patent or a copyright, for example - and the courts are usually not willing to create new protections. The company copying the design could also argue that there's only a limited number of ways to make a plane.

Companies copy other products all the time - they usually make a few small changes to avoid any legal issues. And most would get a legal opinion from in-house or an outside legal firm to make sure they're on good legal footing.

And there's nothing wrong with a buyer looking for the best price for the goods they buy. That's what our economic system encourages buyers to do.

If you do not like the "ethics" of a company, such as Wall Mart, you should not shop there. But you should not condemn those who do shop there. They're only doing what our economic system wants them to do.

Mike

Alan DuBoff

01-30-2009, 12:04 AM

Thanks for the website. I've been buying "American Apparel" T shirts made in Los Angeles. More pricey than the imports but for the 7 T shirts I own... They seem to last longer as well.
All American had t-shirts for $6.99, $7.99 w/pocket, made in America. They gave me one for greater than $60 purchase, so will let you know of the quality.

I have another thread on starting a set of essential planes, and I am going to commit myself to either buying some of the fabulous new planes from American mfgs or used Stanleys thereby supporting US business men who do all the good work of finding these planes.
That's a good thought. Even when you buy used, you keep your $$$s in America. That in itself is important in the end.

Now if I could be a little more sure of my job future I swear I would go out and by a nice US made truck!
Interesting that Toyota trucks are now made in America, not far from me at NUMMI. My next door neighbor is working there, from Toyota Japan. He will be here for a few years more. Most folks don't know that GM has a stake in these trucks either. This type of localized manufacturing will be more popular in the future, IMO.

FWIW, I would buy an American truck if I thought it would ensure my job future also, but seeing I was laid off last week, I'm not gonna be buying a new truck from anywhere...I do have time to work in the shop though...just not the way I wanted to get it...:o

James Carmichael

01-30-2009, 12:37 AM

Why not just look for an actual bedrock at the flea market? You could probably get it for a third of what WC sells these for.

If someone is selling orignal Bedrocks for $35-$40 apiece, I'll buy all they've got. WC lists their #5 for $120. That wouldn't buy a good long look at an original 605 in good condition. For half that sum, you might net a ratty 605 with a brazed sole and broken tote.

Tony Zaffuto

01-30-2009, 9:24 AM

I disagree Jim.

I got a very decent 605 from Ebay for $90.00 (including shipping). No cracks in sole, no chips on tote or knob, jappaning was at least 85% if not better. Two issues, someone dabbed some red oxide primer on the inside of the sole, probably as an ID marker and the yoke pin was replaced with a small finish nail. I added a Hock blade ($35.00) and a LN chipbreaker ($30.00) for a total out of the pocket cost of $155.00. This is now a jack plane that can also take shavings down to .0015, without even touching the sole on a lapping plate (if that sort of thing trips your trigger).

Go to any tool sale and you'll find similar bargains. Out here in PA, there are several good ones coming up. The first is Patina, in Damascus, MD and the second is the dealer sale for the Brown auction. At either of these, you'll find decent 605s in that price range. You can also call tool dealers such as the Leach-Meister and tell them you're looking for a user 605 (not a collector) and I bet you won't be far off my price.

As far as the Borg, Grant and Woodriver planes, the Bedrock designs have been around for years, although I feel the similarity in looks was a deliberate attempt to deceive. If these planes perform as good as a Bedrock, then it's not all smoke and mirrors. As far as the Veritas scraper and #95 knock-offs, I hope LV defends their patents, and with that, let the courts decide this issue.

T.Z.

John Schreiber

01-30-2009, 9:51 AM

. . . doing what our economic system wants them to do. . . .
I hope this is seen as philosophical discussion rather than political, but shouldn't the economic system serve the people rather than the people serve the economic system? I think that the argument that serving the economic system also best serves the people has been demonstrated to be impractical.

Mike Henderson

01-30-2009, 10:13 AM

I can't answer your question, John - maybe a bit too philosophical for me. The point I was trying to make is that we have an existing economic system in our country (and in most of the world) and it encourages people to take certain actions, one of which is to seek the best value for their money.

I suppose we can argue whether that economic system provides the "best" outcome, but that would get fairly political, I suppose.

Mike

Dave Anderson NH

01-30-2009, 10:13 AM

Just a friendly warning folks. So far this thread has remained civil, but it skirts at the edge of what is allowed by the SMC Terms of Service. I will let it remain in place as long as this doesn't degenerate into a free for all. At better alternative would be to get back on topic though.

Thanks for your cooperation. It's obvious that folks can disagree and still respect each other. I like that.

David Keller NC

01-30-2009, 10:29 AM

"I'm not an attorney, but I'd think a suit based on "trade dress" would be tough to make if the brand is displayed prominently. There are legal ways to protect your design - a design patent or a copyright, for example - and the courts are usually not willing to create new protections."

Mike - Just an aside here (and for anyone else interested in this issue that may be considering making furniture, toys, etc... for sale), there's an interesting article about this in the November, 2008 issue of Popular Woodworking - the title is "Imitation Could be Illegal". Some of the topics discussed are patent protections, design patents, trade dress infringement, and copyright protections.

I suspect you're quite right about the difficulty of such a lawsuit, though there have been a fair number of successful cases (for the plaintiff). I rather doubt such a suit would be filed, at least by Lie-Nielsen. I've a feeling L-N isn't big enough to support the legal bills, though Lee Valley might decide to pursue action due to a design patent infringement.

Dave - There's good reasons quite a few of us are on this board, what you've alluded to is one of them. While a topic like this (or the discussion that's ensued) may well make a moderator nervous, these issues do come up and are worth discussing without the mud-slinging and personal attacks I've seen on a couple of other forums (that shall remain nameless :D)

Jerome Hanby

01-30-2009, 12:41 PM

I wasn't saying there was only one source for American made blue jeans, I was relaying what this particular web site had online at the time.

Point I was making: someone went to the trouble to construct such a website, but couldn't collect a "strong" number of entries. My assumption was that they made some kind of effort and their results reflected a fairly accurate general,but definitely not not empirical, view of reality.

On the flip side there are some website where you can identify Chinese goods too. I think two of them are walmart.com and target.com:D.

Jerome,

This is not true for all of America, there are other alternatives.

I was told about this site in the past couple days, they do have made in America Carhartt. I don't know if it is NOS or not, but it seems that some is still made in America. I just bought 2 pair of Carhartt jeans and returned them today and got my money back. I'm ordering from this site online, or try to find the Gussets.

I put my money where my mouth is, I suggested the surplus store think about carrying Gussets also.

http://www.allamericanclothing.com/usa_carhartt.php

Also, these are made in America:

http://www.gussetclothing.com/

Jim Koepke

01-30-2009, 12:50 PM

Interesting that Toyota trucks are now made in America, not far from me at NUMMI.

Is a large percentage of parts made here, or is it mostly "assembled in America?"

I can think of only a few tools in my shop that are not made in America. Some may be Canada or Europe. Mostly the newer power tools are likely not made in the states even with a name that has been an American name for years before the move to off shore production.

jim

Brian Kent

01-30-2009, 3:41 PM

The standard for calling a car "Domestic" is 75% domestic parts content.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/06/30/013345.html

This article lists the top 10 in terms of domestic parts percentage. Toyota holds 3 of these spots.

Dan Karachio

01-30-2009, 11:24 PM

The new unisaw is made in TN! Oops, forgot I was in the hand tool forum!

John Sanford

01-31-2009, 1:55 AM

All companies can do is follow the law. This is true, but it must be noted that the People's Republic of China for all intents and purposes completely ignores all intellectual property laws. Not surprising when you consider the "everything is owned by the people" rationalization. I'm not sure how intellectual infringement works in a situation such as this, how much liability exposure Woodcraft may have if the planes do cross the line, given that they are not the manufacturer.

It will be interesting to see these planes, but in truth, AFAIC (concerned), I buy my tools as much based on the "story" as on the cost. The tools don't have to meet any sort of Return on Investment number, just give me a warm fuzzy when I use them or look at them, and satisfy their intended function.

Are there tools that come from Asia that have "compelling" stories? Sure. Japanese chisels, some Japanese handsaws and marking tools, many of those Asian wood bodies pull-planes, etc. Knock offs of classic and updated Western metal planes? Nope, not even if they were done by Master Smith Chu Wong. Irwin/Marples chisels, made in China? Nope. Wusthoff-Trident knives, made in China of German steel? Nope.

So, for the lad (or lass) who simply wants X level of performance at the lowest direct cost, these planes may be a heckuva deal. For me? I doubt it. I'm going to be getting two bench planes when I can, a jack and a smoother. Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley are almost certain to get my money for them. I've visited LN in Maine, they're part of my story, as is Lee Valley. Not so some anonymous factory in China.

Truth be told, 95% of the folks posting here do woodworking purely for the enjoyment, not for economic reasons. We do it because of the chapters it adds to our life stories, and because it allows us to write enduring elements (we hope) into the life stories of those we care about.

Brian J. Williams

01-31-2009, 2:41 AM

Joel Goodman

01-31-2009, 12:08 PM

+1 for Brian Williams!

Alan DuBoff

01-31-2009, 12:47 PM

Is a large percentage of parts made here, or is it mostly "assembled in America?"
Jim,

I don't know exactly percentages, nor that my neighbor would tell me. I'm certain he knows.

It is my understanding that the drive trains and chassis are manufactured to GM spec, and the fit/finish of the Japanese trucks is combined to essentially make "best of breed".

The trucks are assembled in Fremont, CA, very close to Silicon Valley. (EDIT: to note that this is one of the most expensive areas to live in America)

AFAIK, Toyota trucks are the No. 1 selling truck in America nowadays. And if you haven't seen, they stuff big 'ol 5.7 liter engines in them for those that need the power. That's a full size pickup that competes head on with the Chevy and Ford trucks.

Alan DuBoff

01-31-2009, 12:59 PM

David Bodkin

01-31-2009, 1:19 PM

AFAIK, Toyota trucks are the No. 1 selling truck in America nowadays. And if you haven't seen, they stuff big 'ol 5.7 liter engines in them for those that need the power. That's a full size pickup that competes head on with the Chevy and Ford trucks.

I think the Tundra will need to quadruple its sales before achieving that title.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCAN0545702820090105?rpc=44

Alan DuBoff

01-31-2009, 2:57 PM

I think the Tundra will need to quadruple its sales before achieving that title.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCAN0545702820090105?rpc=44
David,

Possibly so, doesn't look like Toyota is up near the top. OTOH, maybe you haven't been reading ALL the headlines lately... (http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/090130/business_us_gm_bailout.html?.v=1)

I would say that Toyota has their act together enough that they aren't taking handouts from the Japan govies...not like GM is doing with the U.S. govies...:eek:

If your selling 90 percent of the trucks sold but aren't showing a profit, what is wrong with this picture? :(

Dan Karachio

01-31-2009, 3:50 PM

I put a lot of effort into my work, and then to have some jackass steal it makes me want to reach for my 1911. (Being from the Great White North, I don't believe Rob is allowed to own a 1911- pity.)
Brian Williams, PE PG

Brian, I am unfamiliar with a Stanley 1911? Is it a bench plane or a block plane? :-)

David Bodkin

01-31-2009, 5:23 PM

David,

Possibly so, doesn't look like Toyota is up near the top. OTOH, maybe you haven't been reading ALL the headlines lately... (http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/090130/business_us_gm_bailout.html?.v=1)

I would say that Toyota has their act together enough that they aren't taking handouts from the Japan govies...not like GM is doing with the U.S. govies...:eek:

If your selling 90 percent of the trucks sold but aren't showing a profit, what is wrong with this picture? :(

Simmer down, I was simply correcting your assertion that the Tundra was the best selling truck currently. Discussing business models and the assistance both companies get from their respective governments is a debate for somewhere else on the web.

So, how bout those planes everyone?

Alan DuBoff

01-31-2009, 6:04 PM

Simmer down, I was simply correcting your assertion that the Tundra was the best selling truck currently. Discussing business models and the assistance both companies get from their respective governments is a debate for somewhere else on the web.
Well, it is interesting in the sense that the Tacoma is a bigger seller of trucks for Toyota, per my next door neighbor. He might have no clue though...;)

So, how bout those planes everyone?
They look like copies of other planes, as mentioned.;)

Clay Thigpen

01-31-2009, 8:09 PM

Well fellows I'm on the fence, I know better than to get my foot stuck in the "mire" that this discussion has become because we can go around and around all month and accomplish nothing but hurt feelings and dislike of fellow neanders.

I love to see that people still believe in this country and that it can, will, and still does represent the ideals that we all love ( I tend to be a cynic on this part these days). I love to see people supporting buy American and defending their beliefs, it's a hard thing to stand by your ideals and not back down, but there are two sides of a coin ( light can't exist with out the dark, it's not just black and white, insert Yoda comment here).

It's a hard thing for a man of my age (23) to look at an issue like this and not want to comment but I'm torn between the two issues ( putting aside the original question as to how these planes preform). On the one hand I would love to see more American jobs and more things made in
America. On the other I lost my job first of the year and money couldn't be tighter ( I still manage to buy most of what I want but the excess in the bank I'm used to isn't there anymore). Now I love the idea of woodworking with hand tools I've got a good mind for it and the knowledge to do it, ( if I could just muster the skill, energy, and dedication), but my generation falls with the Ikea side of things. I shop at Wal-mart ( my grandmother works there), and if I can save a buck, or a few hundred, I will ( I'm a cheap man and I've made peace with that).

What you have to ask yourself is do we love this hobby enough accept that if it is to survive we will have to accept new blood into the fold? For me if my grand-father or father was still alive I'd have someone to teach me a great deal about woodworking because that is what they did, but they did it with power tools where they could and when they could afford them: read they bought new tools to replace what they had based on price and if it got the job done they got paid and might buy a new better tool with that and so on.

I need cheap tools and I get them from where ever I can so I can learn more and do more. I buy them from flea markets and antique stores ( I go to a nice one ran by an old Chinese guy who is ex Chinese military that sells mostly tools and junk and sends his money home to his kin) if I can get an old Stanley I grab it up if it's under $30-$45, I like to touch anything I buy because I have to inspect it for flaws something I can't do to my satisfaction on ebay ( and I just like to Handel it first) I can't find a # 7 or 8 of anything so far around me at all and none on the bay that I can afford. If the Borg, Grant or these Woodcraft planes work good and will do the job then I'd buy one. Do I feel like I'm supporting terrorist or Communism? Nope I'm doing what others did when they went with an English made wooden body plane instead of an Irish one. If the companies want to fight it out in court that will be up to them and I'm sure they will in time. But knowing that makes me want to snatch up one of these all the faster if they work good and are likely to no longer be imported such as Norinco guns.

Do I play the devils advocate? yes. am I truly on the fence Yes. Do I think I'll make enemies and not get good deals on tools? maybe. But you can't change a persons mind if they are just shutting out the information coming in.

Joel Goodman

01-31-2009, 8:30 PM

Try one of the reputable dealers you see mentioned here for old tools. If when you get it it doesn't meet your expectations they will take it back. I have a type 15 -- #7 that I'm very happy with that I purchased that way. Wasn't as cheap as Ebay but a lot less hassle -- and still a small fraction of a new one.

Michael L. Martin

02-01-2009, 10:02 AM

John,

Very well said........my sentiments also.

Jay Yoder

02-01-2009, 11:10 AM

WOW, amazing someone asked the innocent question "does tool X work" and it goes into this! I love this forum b/c of all the great info and folks that make up our great hobby/profession. I believe Clay summed up the generational divide that generally exists. I understand both sides. Buy American and support our "neighbors" versus buy tool needed with available funding (instead of going without or generating a ton of debt). It is a slippery slope. If all things equal or within 10% then American it is...unfortunately that is rarely the case. I work hard for my money and to hear of the "bailout bonuses which have been passed out" by both parties, it makes me sick! but that is a different subject. Bottom line is that I work hard and long just to make ends meet! some months are easier compared to others but I cant always afford to be choosy. I prefer to buy American too, but I have had my share of "issues" with American mfg stuff too. End of day if i could afford a LV or other elite plane i would buy it b/c it is the high quality tool. We all buy the best tool we can afford. But ultimately it comes down to personal choice. For some it is a simple choice, enjoy woodworking with lower quality tools until if/when they can be upgraded; or not do it at all. I hope I my thoughts are understood, I am not trying to offend, rather just reminding folks that everyone's checkbook shows different balances.

Ron Conlon

02-01-2009, 11:14 AM

I've spent some time in China during the adoption of my two kids. One of the trips was in a heavy-industry city known for metalworking in central China. Sitting on the sidewalks in front of the shops were kids 12 to 14 years old in their street clothes running angle grinders and even WELDING without ANY protective gear - no safety glasses, no dark glasses for welding. And there's your cheap prices. For me, these are not "anonymous" factories in China. They are kids JUST LIKE YOURS and certainly like mine, as they may have gone directly down this path.

I've been relatively pro-business in the past, got my MBA and love working in small businesses. However, you don't have to look very far to see that left unregulated, businesses can and do flout the intent of the law in order to generate profit. From mining and the early industrial age up to the mortgage schemes of late, businesses will perform unethically until laws are created to stop it. When we say "I don't care, I just want the cheap goods" we are implicit in the scheme to curtail the regulations that have generated the quality of life that we take for granted as Americans. Quality of life comes not only from a high GNP but from those regulations not allowing your company to exploit you.

george wilson

02-01-2009, 12:28 PM

The Stanley and Bedrock planes are long out of patent protection,and everyone copies them anyway. Personally,I wish folks could be more original anyway. Unless these repros are malleable iron,not just cast iron,they will break if dropped hard enough. A wooden floor is a lot better than concrete for not breaking planes. The Lie Neilson planes are copies too,but their iron ones are malleable.60-64 Rockwell is entirely too hard for plane irons,because the steel is so hard and brittle that the microscopic edge will break off,making the iron seem dull. I always found that an iron that could just barely be cut with a NEW smooth cut file would hold an edge much longer. This means a hardness of about 53-54 Rockwell,for normal carbon steel irons.If the irons are A2 steel,an air hardening steel,they can be harder due to alloys. A2 will hold an edge much longer than 1095 or 01 steel. I make a lot of punches and dies for punching out shapes in a punch press,and I always use A2. There are more sophisticated steels such as HSS,but their grain structure is too coarse to hold a good edge,or else I don't have the facilitys to harden and temper them since they require inert gas furnaces,or very high temperatures.

Alan DuBoff

02-01-2009, 2:55 PM

A2 will hold an edge much longer than 1095 or 01 steel.
This is true, however it won't be able to attain as sharp an edge as O1. O1 produces a sharper edge than A2, at the expense of durability.

george wilson

02-01-2009, 3:05 PM

David Keller NC

02-01-2009, 4:15 PM

"End of day if i could afford a LV or other elite plane i would buy it b/c it is the high quality tool. We all buy the best tool we can afford."

It has been my direct experience that this is not universally true. There are plenty of individuals that have an emotional involvement in buying as cheaply as possible, and then complaining that they still paid too much, regardless of their income.

The most extreme case I've experienced in the last few years is an individual working as an engineer (a co-worker). This particular person made well over 100k a year, shopped at the Borg for cheap Ryobi power tools, and then regaled us at lunch with comments that said store is ripping off their customers. In other words, he felt that the least expensive brand of power tools on the planet were a rip-off.

Buying the best tools that you can afford, and that you really need, is frugal. Buying the least expensive item in a given category at the lowest possible price though your income and budget might allow a much wiser purchase is "cheap", and the two aren't the same.

Alan DuBoff

02-01-2009, 4:26 PM

Alan,what you say is true about 01 taking a better edge than A2. Durability is the problem,so we are not in disagreement. In fact,though,1095 plain carbon steel will take the sharpest edge of any steel,but does not hold it as well. Plane irons take a huge amount of abuse. Much more than a chisel. A2 is the much better selection due to the need for durability. LN used to use 01. I encouraged them to go to A2.
George,

I completely agree, and I do feel A2 is better for the durability, certainly.

O1, as you know is easier to work with in regards to heat treating, and somehow I always feel that if I had to work a piece of O1 it would be easier than A2. Reality is that I haven't needed to work very much other than what I was forging anyway, so that is not really something that has come into play.

What technique do you use for tempering A2? I've heard of folks that just wave it in the air, and it hardens fine, but have never tried that. O1 is easier for me as I know that oil will do the trick for me after taking the metal to red/orange.

george wilson

02-01-2009, 4:37 PM

Economic reality being what it is,we have no choice in many cases but to buy an import. Americans want cheap goods. That's why we are no longer manufacturing many kinds of products. Anyone know of an American TV set? Zenith was the last one,and that was a long time ago. Is there one now?

george wilson

02-01-2009, 9:37 PM

The question of 01 being easier to harden/work than A2 has been raised. When I first began buying LN planes,I tested one of their irons on my hardness tester,and found it to be less hard than advertised. I called them.They wanted to know WHERE I had tested the iron. I told them just past the bevel,and asked why. They told me they were using 01,and because 01 is prone to warp,they only hardened the LAST INCH ! We had a discussion about the cost of their planes,vs the 1" of hardening. I encouraged them to go to A2. It costs more,but their rate of failure would be greatly lessened,and A2 is much better. Stays sharp about 5X as long as 01. They did go to A2 later on. A2 requires that the steel either be wrapped in stainless foil,or heated in an inert gas furnace. I use the foil method,and put a little piece of brown paper in the foil wrap to burn up the small amount of oxygen,which will leave any air hardening steel with a soft skin due to higher hardening temperatures. The A2 stays nice and flat,and hardens in still air. No fan needed,which might induce warping from being a faster quench. Tempering is very straight forward.Usually a 400 degree draw is done. A toaster oven with a high temp. thermometer in it works fine. There is only about a 25 degree window for optimum tempering,and tempering must be done as soon as the steel is cool enough to barely hold it in your hand (meanwhile,my electric furnace is taking hours to get cool.) I use A2 for many precision punches and mating dies. It doesn't change size much at all. 01 does,and 1095 is very treacherous. I find it takes a razor edge,and is nice to work with when you don't want the work spoiled by warping or cracking. True,1095 takes the sharpest edge,but won't hold it a fraction as long.01 is slightly more durable on edge holding than 1095. 1095 has to be used on saws because it can take a spring temper so the saw doesn't crack.

Mike Henderson

02-01-2009, 11:24 PM

The folks in the PRC continue to steal any idea they can (from computers to Terex trucks to Caterpillar equipment to our missile technology and now to LV planes). They do so without any hesitation. Why? They back-engineer about anything, and then turn around and sell it elsewhere.

It doesn't help when folks like Woodcraft buys from them and then sells the illegitimate product here. As Rob said, it's theft of intellectual property, pure and simple. I for one will not tolerate that kind of thing. In my engineering practice, I've had designs, drawings, and entire plan sets lifted by low-balling types who simply white-out my title block and add their own. I put a lot of effort into my work, and then to have some jackass steal it makes me want to reach for my 1911. (Being from the Great White North, I don't believe Rob is allowed to own a 1911- pity.)

Once educated about the background of the knock-offs (be it tools or engineering concepts) the consumer is then as guilty as the profiteer for buying the product. I for one will NEVER again darken the door of Woodcraft for as much as a drill bit.

Brian Williams, PE PG
If the Chinese companies really were stealing protected intellectual property, it would be easy to stop it when it was shipped into the US. I think you're taking certain situations, where theft actually occurs, and extrapolating that situation to the planes sold by Woodcraft. If there was actual theft of protected intellectual property, I doubt if Woodcraft would be selling them. They don't want or need the bad publicity, nor the legal problems.

What people seem to be claiming is that since the Woodcraft planes look like another company's planes (maybe LN or even LV), therefore Woodcraft or the Chinese maker is committing theft of intellectual property. But no one has offered any example of what intellectual property has been copied or stolen. Making a plane that looks like another company's plane is not theft, as long as the design is not protected through some legal means (design patent, copyright, etc.).

In the 1700's and early 1800's American companies stole designs and ideas from English companies in order to advance their industrial competence. Certainly what Woodcraft is doing with those planes is a lot less than US companies did back then.

But I doubt if any theft is actually occurring with the Woodcraft planes, given how litigious we are now days.

Mike

Derek Cohen

02-02-2009, 6:36 AM

Mike

Denial is not a river in Egypt. :(

Regards from Perth

Derek

Chuck Tringo

02-02-2009, 7:28 AM

I have to agree with Mike on this one...in this case the original design is Stanley Bedrock which is no longer in production. The argument of design theft is a weak on as the Lie Nielsens are modeled after the Bedrocks also...which is perfectly legal since the patent is long since expired and they are no longer in production by Stanley. The Woodriver planes are no more design thefts than Lie Nielsens are. Now if your argument is that they are made in the PRC using less than desirable manufacturing conditions such as child labor, etc. then you are likely correct and while not illegal from a US standpoint, you are perfectly in rights not to send your business to WC, however if it is for that reason that you condemn these planes, then I would think that need to completely quit shopping at WC and take a good look at everything else you may have purchased from them or elsewhere, as it may have a made in China/India/Taiwan/Vietnam/insertyourfavorite3rdworldcountryher written on it. Personally, Im spending a year in the sandbox soon so Ill be saving for some more LN/LV myself, but I won't be condemning anyone who decides to give these or the new Stanleys (made in mexico I believe) a try, espescially in these economic times...

Mike Henderson

02-02-2009, 10:59 AM

Mike

Denial is not a river in Egypt. :(

Regards from Perth

Derek
Derek - I'm sorry, but I do not understand your comment. If you think there was theft of protected intellectual property by WC, you need to specify exactly what you think was stolen. Copying an unprotected design is not theft.

But perhaps there's some other aspect of the planes which you feel was protected and was stolen. Generalized accusations of theft without saying what was stolen are unfair to WC.

You may feel it's unethical for one company to "copy" another company's unprotected design. If so, you can refuse to purchase the product but such copying goes on all the time and is not illegal.

Mike

David Keller NC

02-02-2009, 11:08 AM

George - I'd encourage you to start a new topic/thread on your experiences with A2, O-1 and 1095. It's clear you've some expertise in this area that would be of great interest to those of us interested in making our own tools. And your comments will get buried in this thread - it's already pretty huge.

One question (among many) that I'd have is regarding your hardening method for A2 - I've never heard of wrapping the iron in stainless foil and adding a sacrificial organic material to scavenge the oxygen - where the heck does one aquire stainless steel foil?

Derek Cohen

02-02-2009, 11:26 AM

Mike Henderson

02-02-2009, 11:41 AM

Hi Mike

You wrote: "If there was actual theft of protected intellectual property, I doubt if Woodcraft would be selling them. They don't want or need the bad publicity, nor the legal problems."

I think that you are being naive in this regard. Firstly, that scraper plane (in my initial post) is a LV-protected design. It was being sold by Woodcraft until LV stepped in. The question that begs to be asked is why Woodcraft sold it in the first place when they must have known that it was a copy. Secondly, Woodcraft appear to be dealing with the same factory that has been responsible for the Grant planes with the LN-lookalikes and the LV Edge-lookalike.

I am not talking about selling Stanley designs that are in the public domain. Everyone is free to manufacture and sell these - as long as they do not step over the line and copy the presentation used by another manufacturer (e.g. LN). The Grant Bedrocks certainly do this, and my impression from images is that Woodcraft are selling the same planes and simply altered the colour of the lever cap. This may or may not be enough to avert conflict, but it still comes across as a little suspect.

Regards from Perth

Derek
So, are you alleging any theft of intellectual property in the planes that WC recently announced? Or are your posts related to the scraper plane only? Is there anything protected on the Bedrock derived planes?

Mike

[It sounds like your complaint is that the planes just look too much like the LN planes, whether such copying is legal or not. A good example of copying is that Microsoft copied the look and feel of the Macintosh when they produced Windows. But Apple had copied the look and feel of PARC's Alto and Star. If Jobs had not copied PARC because it was not "ethical" we'd not be as far along with computers as we are today. The diffusion of ideas is how we make progress as a society, and has been going on for thousands of years. Companies have legal ways to protect their original ideas (for a limited time), and if they don't, shame on them. And if their ideas aren't original, they have no right to protest if someone "copies" the ideas.]

Joel Goodman

02-02-2009, 12:06 PM

As none of the posters on this thread are attorneys I think the legal arguments can become pointless. Perhaps WC was concerned about the brass colored lever caps and that's why the planes they are selling are not LN "look a likes" in that regard. Tom LN didn't bring out his line of planes while the Stanley Bedrocks were in production, but rather because Stanley had given up on quality planes. Some of us feel that an ethical line has been crossed, particularly with the Grants, and are expressing moral outrage -- this may or may not be totally rational -- but I do feel it also. But then I do drive a Ford and can't give you a rational reason to do so!

Mike Henderson

02-02-2009, 12:20 PM

As none of the posters on this thread are attorneys...
Yeah, an attorney would not post here. S/He would say, "That's an interesting situation. Why don't you drop by my office and we'll talk about it.":)

Mike

John Keeton

02-02-2009, 12:31 PM

Well stated, and precisely correct!;)
Yeah, an attorney would not post here. S/He would say, "That's an interesting situation. Why don't you drop by my office and we'll talk about it.":)

Mike

Brian Kent

02-02-2009, 12:41 PM

Just a note - I appreciate the fact that we have been able to get so far into a complex issue in a world that rarely thinks beyond sound-bites. Thanks, everyone.

My own 2 cents:

I lean towards buying American, but really I want every person to have a chance to make a living, in any and every country. The job of working towards fair trade, child protection in labor, work safety and environmental protections, honest pay for honest work, etc., is hard work. This kind of discussion really helps.

george wilson

02-02-2009, 12:44 PM

You get stainless steel foil from Manhatten Supply. there are 2 types: Get the foil with titanium added. Good for higher temperatures. Thing is,a roll is fairly expensive,and would probably last a home shop user longer than he would live. I don't know how to buy smaller rolls. Maybe Brownell's Gunsmithing?

The trouble with me starting a new thread about this is that mose members,being woodworkers,probably don't have 2000+ degree electric furnaces,or large oil and brine quenches. There are shops you can google who harden steel for customers.It would involve some cost,though,maybe more than some might think a plane iron is worth. When it comes to worth,I have ignored what it's worth in order to explore,experiment,and learn new things. My interests cover a lot of area,which is why my large shop is getting too full of stuff !!!

Tony Zaffuto

02-02-2009, 12:56 PM

Dave,

I also would like to see a new thread started about A2, O1 and heat treating. I have heat treated (or rather employees of mine) have heat treated a lot of A2 & O1 over the years, but as you, I've never heard of putting a piece of flammable material withing the heat wrap foil. Learn something new every day!

Tony Z.

Tony Zaffuto

02-02-2009, 1:02 PM

George,

I have a local source for heat treat foil wrap. I have purchased foil wrap previously from Manahattan Supply (now MSC) and know that Brownells has it to (albeit at a high price). My machinists have not spec'ed the wrap with titanium added to it, and we do small batch heat treating in excess of 2000 degrees F, although for critical items, we generally out-source.

Most tool steel supply houses (do a web search) sell heat treat foil wrap, although I can't answer the roll sizes available.

T.Z.

george wilson

02-02-2009, 1:29 PM

Titanium is good for an extra few hundred degrees.I'd have to look it up. Maybe later I could dope out a post on heat treating. Right now I'm putting up shop shelves.

Tristan Raymond

02-02-2009, 1:43 PM

If people are concerned that China doesn't have adequate environmental protections and poor worker living standards they should not buy these. However, to paint this as a black and white issue is foolish. Some smart aleck will simply come along and point out that the USA and Canada lag in these areas as well - compared to Europe. Shades of gray.

I won't be buying any of these planes. Why? I can't see how they'd be any/much better than an older Stanley Bailey, but they cost more. If I want a high quality tool and I have $100, I may as well save a bit longer and buy a LN or LV. Plus, China has low standards of living for their workers and poor environmental protections. But, I'm an American - I can't afford really nice European goods.

george wilson

02-02-2009, 9:16 PM

Tri Hoang

02-02-2009, 9:41 PM

What I found attractive on this particular jack plane is the Bedrock design, ductile cast iron body, and thick iron/chip breaker (3mm or 1/8"). The price is definitely not more than comparable Bedrock Stanley planes I've come across. In fact, I've seen some old Bedrocks selling for more than the modern LN/LV planes.

There are, of course, other issues to consider besides technical specs/cost as pointed out by many others.

Tristan Raymond

02-03-2009, 12:40 AM

Tristan,I own several LN's myself,and they really are better than old Stanleys. The blade steel is better,being A2. Bodys are malleable iron,which doesn't break very readily,and the castings are thicker. I usually make more artistic knobs for mine is my only complaint. Some of the knobs they use look like electrical terminals. I have knurls that are the old type,such as microscope knobs were made with,and the older planes,too.

I have a few LNs and a few Veritas planes as well. If I had the funds all my planes would be LN/LV. I also have several older Stanley planes that I find very usable. I just don't see a market for planes that are substantially more expensive than an old Stanley (Bailey) without the quality of the LN/LV planes. The market will decide.

jim hedgpeth

02-24-2009, 6:58 PM

Call me frugal or cheap whatever, but I had been looking for planes like these. Cheap (er compared to LV, LN), reasonably well made, and good performers. That said the similarity to LN planes is unsettling, not to mention the obvious attempts to copy the boggs spokeshaves, and LV tools . I find it very unlikely anyone would "confuse" them, as any who knows what they are looking at (sure,:confused: its a sharp little cutter thinggy) will know the dif.
Cheap or not though I will not buy these, as I feel (legally or not ) they have definately crossed a line.
I wont get into all the legal + political as that falls under another topic all together, even though it can be applied here.

Just my $ .02

Derek Cohen

02-24-2009, 7:45 PM

Hi Jim

I applaud you following your conscience. This is what life needs to be all about. It is no less a part of woodworking.

Regards from Perth

Derek

george wilson

02-24-2009, 9:09 PM

Jim,do you buy generic medicine? I sure do.If the patent has expired,it's expired.

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 9:28 PM

Yeah, I can't understand the objections to the Wind River planes. Companies use non-protected ideas all the time. Look at your cell phone - every cell phone has the same features, and often the same look. It's not because every company "happened" to design their phone the same as every other company. In the real world of business companies use other companies' good ideas as long as those ideas are not protected by law.

To expect a company not use use another company's non-protected ideas is naive in the extreme. In fact, it's so naive as to be unbelievable and to make me wonder what the motives are of the people who raise this issue.

Mike

george wilson

02-24-2009, 9:30 PM

Mike,it's because they used ALIEN tech. to design those new electronic gizmos !!!

Joel Goodman

02-24-2009, 9:31 PM

I think the LN "inspired" look (read ripoff) is pretty sleazy. Look at the low angle block -- the bronze and iron look is an exact copy of the LN. We are not talking of modern versions of Stanley like LN and Clifton and Record for that matter -- they all look distinctive -- no one is trying to copy the others look. This is not the same thing -- to me it's about the same as the fake fancy watches; all that's missing is the bogus "Rolex" logo.

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 10:07 PM

The next generation of cell phones will have some that use essentially all the ideas in the iPhone. Some will even look like the iPhone. Are you going to refuse to buy one of those because they took ideas from Apple? Or protest in a forum that the phone looks too much like the iPhone? Apple stole the Macintosh look and feel from PARC. And then Gates stole the Mac look and feel. I never hear any complaints about that.

Two products that look similar but are clearly marked with different trademarks are fine in our legal system and in our marketplace, as long as one didn't steal a protected idea from another.

Mike

Derek Cohen

02-24-2009, 10:40 PM

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 11:03 PM

Just because something is legal, does not make it ethical.

Being directed in life by what you can get away with is OK with some. Is this acceptable to you?

Edit to include Mike's post: It is OK to copy if you have permission to copy. Usually this includes paying royalties on ideas, methods, designs, and technique. Otherwise it is theft.

Regards from Perth

Derek
Just because somebody builds something, they do not have the right to stop anyone else from doing the same. Over many years - centuries - we've developed the rules (laws) about intellectual property and trademarks. Only certain things and ideas can be protected and the "inventor" has to take affirmative action to protect their intellectual property. Without that legal protection, how is someone else to know if the ideas are protected, and who owns them? Maybe the company who is now building the product took the idea from some small inventor. Should someone else pay the company for the use of those ideas, or even seek their permission? That's why we have a legal system, to sort out these things.

It is okay to copy ideas that are not protected in the law. In fact, our legal system and market system encourages companies to do so, and we all benefit from the advances that occur from that copying.

It appears you want to impose some different standard on the manufacture of hand planes than are used on all other products.

Mike

[If LN has some intellectual property in their planes, they have the obligation to take actions to protect it, such as getting a patent. If they do not, the law says that the ideas are public domain, open to all. And it certainly is not theft to use public domain ideas.]

Ray Gardiner

02-24-2009, 11:09 PM

<snip>Apple stole the Macintosh look and feel from PARC. And then Gates stole the Mac look and feel. I never hear any complaints about that.

Two products that look similar but are clearly marked with different trademarks are fine in our legal system and in our marketplace, as long as one didn't steal a protected idea from another.

Mike

Hi Mike,
Whilst I'm not wishing to take this off-topic any further than it already is, I feel a minor correction is in order, Apple did not steal from Xerox PARC, the history is well documented
see http://www.mackido.com/Interface/ui_history.html

In the context of tool design, there is nearly always a gradual evolution of tool design to suit the task in hand, in that tool makers most often tend to build on (be inspired by) pre-existing designs, there are very few rare examples where a truly new idea or innovation comes along, and when it does, it gets mercilessly panned for being different, I could cite examples, like the Glen Drake DT saw, the Bridge City Jointmaker, even the Veritas DT saw etc etc.

The only way a modern tool company can compete with the "me too" generics is to keep innovating, LV is a great example of this approach. I only hope they can stay ahead of the curve.

Regards
Ray

Edit: I should add the other way of staying ahead is to build customer "Brand" loyalty.. Hands up all those who would buy a generic rip-off of Coke-Cola?

george wilson

02-24-2009, 11:14 PM

This discussion became circular some time ago !!

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 11:21 PM

Hi Mike,
Whilst I'm not wishing to take this off-topic any further than it already is, I feel a minor correction is in order, Apple did not steal from Xerox PARC, the history is well documented
see http://www.mackido.com/Interface/ui_history.html

I'm old enough that I saw the Xerox Star (I think it was the Star) at a trade show, and that was before development on the Macintosh was even started. To my eye, the interface on the Star had a *very* similar look and feel to the Mac when it came out. It's well documented that Jobs saw the Star and used the concepts in the Mac - Jobs has even said that himself.

I do not object to what Jobs did, but PARC developed all those ideas. Apple developed their own code and changed the way the interface worked in detail, but anyone would say that the look and feel is the same.

Derek seems to be saying that once PARC developed those ideas for displaying information on a screen, they owned the ideas and anyone should have sought a license before using them. But that's not the way the world works. Maybe the ideas could not be patented. But in any case, Xerox did not seek patents and those ideas were open to all.

We have the same situation with these Wind River planes.

Mike

[We used to joke about PARC - that each week, a truck filled with money would back up to the building and dump the load - but go away empty. Xerox spent a fortune developing a bunch of ideas (object oriented programming - Smalltalk, for example) but never got any of them into the market successfully (made any money on them, that is).]

[I think everyone who saw the Star realized we were looking at the future of personal computing. But the Star was about $10K (if I recall correctly), and that was when $10K was a lot of money.]

Derek Cohen

02-24-2009, 11:33 PM

Derek seems to be saying that once PARC developed those ideas for displaying information on a screen, they owned the ideas and anyone should have sought a license before using them. But that's not the way the world works. Maybe the ideas could not be patented. But in any case, Xerox did not seek patents and those ideas were open to all.

Hi Mike

As I said earlier, there is a difference between being legally empowered to do what you want and it being ethically correct. The "world" may choose to do the former, but many will argue that is why we are in the economic doo-doo we are in at present. The path trodden has simply been a spiraling demand for immediate gratification without consideration for the consequences.

We have the same situation with these Wind River planes.

You said it.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 11:38 PM

Ray Gardiner

02-24-2009, 11:44 PM

I'm old enough that I saw the Xerox Star (I think it was the Star) at a trade show, and that was before development on the Macintosh was even started. To my eye, the interface on the Star had a *very* similar look and feel to the Mac when it came out. It's well documented that Jobs saw the Star and used the concepts in the Mac - Jobs has even said that himself.

I do not object to what Jobs did, but PARC developed all those ideas. Apple developed their own code and changed the way the interface worked in detail, but anyone would say that the look and feel is the same.

Derek seems to be saying that once PARC developed those ideas for displaying information on a screen, they owned the ideas and anyone should have sought a license before using them. But that's not the way the world works. Maybe the ideas could not be patented. But in any case, Xerox did not seek patents and those ideas were open to all.

We have the same situation with these Wind River planes.

Mike

[We used to joke about PARC - that each week, a truck filled with money would back up to the building and dump the load - but go away empty. Xerox spent a fortune developing a bunch of ideas (object oriented programming - Smalltalk, for example) but never got any of them into the market successfully (made any money on them, that is).]

[I think everyone who saw the Star realized we were looking at the future of personal computing. But the Star was about $10K (if I recall correctly), and that was when $10K was a lot of money.]

I almost bought a Xerox Star at a San Jose computer junk shop in the early 1990's, only problem was I had no means to transport it. (sigh)

Apple started development on the Mac (see Jeff Raskin's letters) in 1979, the Xerox Star was released in 1981, When Steve Jobs visited PARC, he didn't even get to see the STAR, in any event Apple gave millions in Apple Stock to Xerox for hiring PARC engineers to work on Apples GUI, hardly stealing....

Regards
Ray

Zahid Naqvi

02-24-2009, 11:52 PM

Ok guys, I will have to wear the moderator hat and remind everyone to not get personal. It hasn't happened yet but the debate has started to simmer and I have seen discussions like these quickly take a nose dive. This is a very interesting thread and I'd hate for it to get pulled because one person got emotional.

Moderator hat off, ww'er hat on.

I understand the argument that anything done within the confines of law should be permissible. On the other hand we are all practitioners of a trade/hobby which is largely devoid of big budget corporations, I am talking neander world here. There is a lot of innovation and fresh ideas coming from one person shops and craftsmen/women in this trade. It has already been mentioned in earlier postings how difficult and expensive it is to file a patent and get it approved. Needless to say this makes it prohibitive for small operations to patent everything they possibly can, which essentially puts them at a disadvantage, and this inability can be exploited. Which in turn brings about the question of legality and morality.

But I believe the real question is how do we treat and view companies and people like LN, LV, Mike Wenzloff, Knight tool works etc. People who own and started these businesses are seen as individuals who are in this business due to the love of the craft and not to make money. None of these guys could foresee riches in the future when they started their respective endeavors. The reality is some of them are still struggling to make ends meet. These people have made innovations in this trade/craft, or dare I say art form, which has been stagnant for the last several decades. We as fellow practitioners and users of their labor of love feel a certain degree of responsibility towards protecting these people. Because if we don't they might disappear from the market and we will be left at the mercy of eBay chasing down 100 year old tools.

I also understand the debate of the right to copy freely available technology or ideas, but the key difference, in my opinion, is value added. Yes Microsoft and Apple both stole the Windows concept from Xerox, and this is not really a secret either. They have made movies about this subject, go look up "Pirates of the Silicon Valley". But look at what Apple did to Windows and what Microsoft did not do. In the geek world Apple and Microsoft are on different planets when it comes to respect and recognition.

People and companies like LN, LV, Wenzloff, Knight etc. did use the existing Stanley and Diston designs, but they did not blindly copy them, they added value to them in terms of materials used, quality of manufacture, additional refinements etc. This I think is what distinguishes the Woodriver planes from LN/LV. Woodriver is a blind copy made to look like a high end tool at a comparatively lower price without adding any value. While LN/LV made tools which truly are unique to them.

Mike Henderson

02-24-2009, 11:55 PM

Just an expansion on Derek's "ethics" claim. How do you resolve disputes if there's no law, just what people think is "ethical"? Derek thinks it's unethical to use non-protected ideas, and I think it's okay.

So I build something that uses one of Derek's a non-protected ideas. He's livid and wants me to pay him for it.

Without the law, how do we settle the dispute? The answer is, "We can't (because we each have different beliefs)." That's why we have the law and we are all asked to live to the law.

The law lets me know in advance whether I'm doing something illegal when I use one of Derek's non-protected ideas. And if he disputes my use, we have a forum to go to to settle the dispute and it will be settled according to existing laws and precedent.

So while Derek disparages the law, I know of no other way to operate in the world. The first requirement of a stable society is a fair, just and open legal system.

Mike

Derek Cohen

02-25-2009, 12:25 AM

Mike Henderson

02-25-2009, 12:39 AM

Hi Mike

This is an interesting thread. I am truly open to hearing the different views, and my responses are merely to add to the debate.

So ... The law lets me know in advance whether I'm doing something illegal when I use one of Derek's non-protected ideas. And if he disputes my use, we have a forum to go to to settle the dispute and it will be settled according to existing laws and precedent.

The point is Mike that - in an ideal world (ha!) - one should not need the law to help one decide what is right and what is wrong. To just use someone's ideas without permission is (ethical and moral) theft, regardless of whether one has the legal right or not. It is polite to ask first. (Yes, I know that this is a naive opinion).

So what do you think of companies that know that they are acting in the grey area? Some might call this greed.

Regards from Perth

Derek
The problem, Derek, is that people have different ideas and beliefs. Without the law, how do we resolve those different ideas and beliefs? Ethics are not absolute, meaning everyone will have the same ethics. For example, some people might believe that care should be withheld from a terminally ill person to minimize their suffering, while another may believe that life should be prolonged at all costs. Both are right to the believer.

The important thing is that the laws are made by taking into account those different ideas and beliefs. But once we settle on the laws, we all need to follow them. And the laws on intellectual property are quite old. England had patent laws in the 1600's and maybe earlier (I read about patents that were issued in the 1600's but they could have existed earlier).

So my take is that Wind River planes are okay - they offer the woodworker a lower cost option than LN planes. This assumes they have not infringed any of LN's protected intellectual property, trademarks, trade dress, etc.

In the long run, it may spur LN to greater heights - more original designs, lower costs, etc. Competition in the market is a good thing, even when it causes pain for the company.

Mike

Barry Nelson

02-25-2009, 5:16 AM

My wifes cousin owns a rubber wholesaler here in Sydney and makes several trips to the east every year,he has branched out into hospital equipment (beds,wheelchairs, walkers, walking sticks etc etc ) he has told me that you can take a set of drawings over there and start going round manufacturers and within a week most of them are back at you with prototypes and prices,and your exclusive drawings /rights to the product are being bandied about all over Singapore or some such ,having knock off copies being made to compete against you.
They are like Japan was straight after the war, cheap crap at the moment but loook out in five-ten years time,the quality just gets better and better,the prices cheaper and heaper.
We have a company over here called Pacific Brands, who make among other things industrial work wear with brands like King Gee,Yakka which are a sort of tradies unofficial uniform, have been around for years.They announced today they are moving all their operations off shore putting 1800 people out of work. 300 of which are in my local area.
Thats how they work!:(

Chuck Tringo

02-25-2009, 7:23 AM

Another thing to consider while were all bashing WC and its woodriver planes...and not to hurt anyone's feelings, I love my LN plane as well, but did Lie Nielsen get permission from Stanley, a company who is still in business, to basically copy/improve the Bedrocks ? I doubt it, the patent was up, they've been out of production, so they made what they wanted to (correct me if anyone has better knowledge). So I don't see how Woodriver copying a copy is getting people so upset, just my 2 cents.

David Keller NC

02-25-2009, 10:24 AM

"But I believe the real question is how do we treat and view companies and people like LN, LV, Mike Wenzloff, Knight tool works etc. People who own and started these businesses are seen as individuals who are in this business due to the love of the craft and not to make money. None of these guys could foresee riches in the future when they started their respective endeavors. The reality is some of them are still struggling to make ends meet. These people have made innovations in this trade/craft, or dare I say art form, which has been stagnant for the last several decades. We as fellow practitioners and users of their labor of love feel a certain degree of responsibility towards protecting these people. Because if we don't they might disappear from the market and we will be left at the mercy of eBay chasing down 100 year old tools."

Zahid has put together the most cogent argument here. There is almost no one on this forum that cannot afford a Lie Nielsen or a Lee Valley plane, or several such planes. And for the very few that cannot, there are plenty of alternatives that are discussed every day on the forum (antique Stanelys, wooden planes, etc...).

There was in fact a discussion with Tom Lie Nielsen a few years ago about why he did not follow the trend and move part of his production to China to make the products cheaper. his reply was somethign to the effect that he had 80 American employees in Maine that depended on him not closing the plant and moving production overseas to feed their kids.

Personally, I have to admire that attitude. While I generally am relatively conservative on such questions, I also recognize the fact that as a nation we cannot continue to export all jobs to other countries that can do it cheaper. Anyone that's familiar with the internet and the communication possibilities that it provides recognizes that it isn't just the hard-labor jobs that are being exported. It is absolutely anything and everything, including medical doctors, engineers, scientists, and just about every other high education and skill profession you can name.

The end result of this is most definitely a rather steep decline in the American standard of living for the benefit of countries with large labor pools and lax standards for regulations of labor and the environment. While a very nice gift to the rest of the world, one needs to realize that this mass migration means the current 60+ crowd will be the last in America that will be able to retire, and their grandchildren will have a drastically lower standard of living.

As convoluted and potentially off-topic as the above might seem, it is precisely the reason that I will not allow a WoodRiver plane in my shop, period. Despite Mike's insistence to the contrary, most of us do not have an ethical sense that is solely governed by laws, nor should we be expected to. Except in very special circumstances (i.e., in a courtroom under oath), it's perfectly legal to lie to someone's face, but that doesn't mean it's ethical, nor would I want to hang around with someone that only applied what was legal to their personal behavior.

If Woodcraft had wanted to, they certainly could have made a line of premium handplanes that did not copy the look and feel of a Lie-Nielsen - it would have been very easy, and very low cost. All it would have taken would be to have used a different metal for the lever caps and screws, and perhaps changed the sidewall profile slightly. But they instead chose to copy the look and feel of Lie-Nielsen very precisely, and I think the reason is obvious. They wanted to set up the thought process in someone's head of "gee, these planes are exactly like the Lie-Nielsens that I know have a superb reputation for quality, and they're half price - great, I'll take a dozen!"

This is precisely the intent of trade-dress infringement - to prevent (or at least make it expensive) to copy someone else's look and feel to piggy back off of their reputation. And it's unethical, period.

Mike Henderson

02-25-2009, 11:10 AM

Just to be clear, my argument is that copying of non-protected ideas is a normal part of business - it occurs in every field, every day. My discussion of the law of intellectual property was only to point out that it is not illegal.

In business, it is not unethical to copy non-protected ideas. In many fields, such a cell phones, if you don't copy you will go out of business.

But I think the complaint most people have is not the copying of non-protected ideas, but the copying of the "look" of the planes, and the fear that the Wood River planes will drive LN out of business and thus affect American jobs and American manufacturing.

Regarding the "look" aspect, I doubt if anyone is going to confuse the Wood River planes for LN planes. But if you feel that making something that looks like a product that's already in the market is unethical, even if it's legal, you have an absolute right to your views, and you should not purchase the product.

Mike

[I'll add that business has certain similarities to sports. When you go into business, you have a set of rules you have to play by - known as the law. If another company does something that's legal, you don't get to shout "Not Fair!!". You knew the rules when you got into the game and you can't blame other people for playing by the rules.]

Justin Green

02-25-2009, 11:28 AM

I majored in tax accounting in college and minored in economics, and I've come to the same conclusion that David and millions of other Americans. "Globalism" or "Free Trade" is severely crippling America.

Both of my grandfathers worked at the railroad most of their adult life (with a brief break to vacation overseas during the 1940's)... Neither of my grandmothers were employed. They worked raising children. MANY children. On top of that, both of my grandparents were able to purchase land, one owned 30 acres and the other 100. Today, for a normal working stiff, this type of lifestyle is a pipe dream. Some of this we've brought upon ourselves in our rush to have a TV in every room or a larger house. Much of this was brought about by increased competition.

We can go back to a 16 hour workday. We can work 6 days a week. We can forego medical insurance and dental. And then we can work like the Chinese or Indians and compete. Or we can put tarriffs on their products, but that's not the current trend, which is to make large conglomerates piles of cash at the expense of product quality and American standard of living by shipping jobs overseas and lowering product quality in some cases. It's sad, really, and most Americans don't have the slightest clue why it's happening.

"Free Trade" is essentially removing the locks in a canal system. All of the water will rush to the same level. We can expect that with continued "globalization" future generations will have a standard of living closer to that of the Chinese or Indians. Theirs will increase and ours will decrease.

"Free Trade" is a means for politicians to raise money for their campaigns from large corporations, and for corporations to add one more private jet to their fleet. It stinks, but this cannot really be argued. Tarriffs on products from countries with essentially slave labor conditions would be appropriate, IMHO. If that means that the price of plasma TV's goes up, so be it. Do people really need one in every room?

Politicians will shout and scream that tarriffs stifle free trade. Who cares? Free trade is strangling the American lower and middle classes. And someone who knocks-off someone else's design, has the work done by Chinese, etc., should be shunned, IMHO.

So I won't purchase these planes, either. I'll support the Americans making a buck off of selling used Stanleys or the guys making great tools here in the US.

Jerome Hanby

02-25-2009, 1:16 PM

Hi Mike,
Whilst I'm not wishing to take this off-topic any further than it already is, I feel a minor correction is in order, Apple did not steal from Xerox PARC, the history is well documented
.
.
.
Edit: I should add the other way of staying ahead is to build customer "Brand" loyalty.. Hands up all those who would buy a generic rip-off of Coke-Cola?

I think you are playing with semantics. I don't think anyone (anyone sane that is) thinks Steve Jobs dressed like a Ninja and sneaked into Xerox after hours and stole the box containing all the UI gizmos. But all the basic look and feel stuff from Windows, Mac OS, Amiga, Atari, Gem, and a host of others was incorporated into the Xerox document processing projects FIRST.

Apple may have paid Xerox to look at their goodies. That payment may or may not have been legally necessary for them to incorporate said goodies into their design. But, Apple did not create all of their UI ideas out of whole cloth. The first cut of Windows that I played with ( version .35, I believe) had a lot more in common with Intergraph's mutant CP/M based graphical design systems than a Lisa.

And I have my hand up, give me a Diet Coke with Splenda clone that's half the price and I'll stack them to the rafters :D