I would be VERY concerned by a seller like this one who can make convincing phony cards like those. I mean, what's to stop him, for example, from making fake Joran rookies or fake 1952 Topps Mantles?
I'm an attorney in real life, but only play one here in the boards. That said, you generally cannot use someone's image or likeness for profit or gain without their permission.
I would think that in addition to it being illegal to use someone's image without their permission, it would also be illegal to use the Topps logo and possibly the photo itself. I admire the guys passion and work, but I personally will not buy unlicensed items such as this or the slew of other items on eBay out of principle.
Very sweet looking cards. I am not a lawyer, but can't he get aroud it somehow by also having say a 1998 Topps Nolan Ryan in the lot, and saying that if you buy the Ryan, I will throw in these custom cards for free? I thought as long as you didn't profit, then it was ok.
if i were a swann or steeler fan i would definetly pick them up before they go away.
Fred
collecting RAW Topps baseball cards 1952 Highs to 1972. looking for collector grade (somewhere between psa 4-7 condition). let me know what you have, I'll take it, I want to finish sets, I must have something you can use for trade.
looking for Topps 71-72 hi's-62-53-54-55-59, I have these sets started
<< <i>I'm an attorney in real life, but only play one here in the boards. That said, you generally cannot use someone's image or likeness for profit or gain without their permission.
/s/ JackWESQ >>
Jack - if I'm correct this comes under the concept of Right to Publicity or intellectual property rights - or personal property rights?
What some may find interesting is that the precedent set by the court which defined the idea of "right to publicity" (as opposed to right of privacy) stemmed from a landmark decision involving Haelen Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum Company in 1953.
In essence the judge said - that signing a waiver of right of privacy to allow one's likeness on a baseball card e.g. - is actually a "right to publicity" - so no one else has a right to use that likeness without the express consent of the individual. Topps tried to argue that a waiver of the right to privacy as signed by a ballplayer for Bowman, e.g., is not transferable - so they felt they had a right to use the likeness.
So - our hobby has had an influence on legal rights still being applied today.
I think he did a great job as well...but they are a little pricey. $5 a set and I might bite.
Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards. Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
The players I believe fall under the celebrity ruling as far as using their likeness for profit or whatever. This is how the Papparazzi makes their money. When you put yourself in a high profile position you give up some of your rights in this regard. Topps is not going to really say anything until he starts mass producing them.
I would be more worried about him starting to come up with fakes of legitimate cards
I think he should make cards of current players in the 1952 Topps design to see what they would look like...... Oh wait, Topps puts out 5 sets of those every year. Nevermind.
<< <i>Well I purchased a set of Swann cards just to see what they are made like and what card stock this seller is using. I'll update once I get them. >>
I'd like to own the sets as well. The paper stock is my only concern.
Please don't forget to let us know what they're like after you recieve them.
The way I see it, he offered to make a set for me for $12, the guy was real cool and offered to send me some scans when hes done and told me if I didnt like them he would try different formats. I requested 52-55 Bowman and 55 Topps AA designs for the Brady, he mentioned if it didnt come out well he would try the 70/80's designs that he already has. I will post some pics when I get them..
<< <i>I think he should make cards of current players in the 1952 Topps design to see what they would look like...... Oh wait, Topps puts out 5 sets of those every year. Nevermind. >>
I think you're on to something. Maybe he could also do a Mickey Mantle set with every Topps/Bowman design ever made.
<< <i>Well I purchased a set of Swann cards just to see what they are made like and what card stock this seller is using. I'll update once I get them. >>
I got the Campbell cards in the mail about a week ago, 'cause I'm into proof cards and oddball stuff. Also, I wanted to get them before the auction was pulled, which never happened.
Please don't get me wrong, these cards are great and a lot of effort went into getting the fonts and colors just right. However, no one is going to be fooled. They have a very flat finish (no gloss) and photo resolution is lower than the real thing, which makes the picture appear slightly fuzzy. They kinda look like a picture of a card. They are not on card stock. The tan color of the reverse is just that - a color. It appears that he prints the fronts and backs on two individual pieces and then glues or sticks them together.
Again, I applaude the effortand I'm satisfied with the quality - I gave him positive feedback. I wasn't expecting old school printing.
Let me know if you'd like a scan.
Mike
"Must these Englishmen Live That I Might Die? Must They Live That I Might Die?" - The Blue Oyster Cult
I bought a set of the Campbell cards - just for the two Saints versions. They are about what I expected, and pretty much as described by others.
If anyone would like the Oilers cards from the Campbell set, PM me your address and they're free to the first person to ask. (The Oilers cards have been claimed).
I had him make a 1952 Topps Mantle card and when I get it I am going to go hide it in my grandpa's attic. A few days later I will go find it in the attic and list it on ebay. I am not sure if this card is real or not so I am selling it as a reprint.
Comments
By the way, talking about breaking the law. I made another video, but this time it dosen't break any laws, so check it out if you would like
Giovanni
D's: 50P,49S,45D+S,43D,41S,40D,39D+S,38D+S,37D+S,36S,35D+S,all 16-34's
Q's: 52S,47S,46S,40S,39S,38S,37D+S,36D+S,35D,34D,32D+S
74T: 241,435,610,654 97 Finest silver: 115,135,139,145,310
73T:31,55,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,80,152,165,189,213,235,237,257,341,344,377,379,390,422,433,453,480,497,545,554,563,580,606,613,630
95 Ultra GM Sets: Golden Prospects,HR Kings,On-Base Leaders,Power Plus,RBI Kings,Rising Stars
/s/ JackWESQ
Me likey.
Only an idiot would have a message board signature.
But they are sweet looking cards though
Topps should employ this guy in their design department
Snorto~
if i were a swann or steeler fan i would definetly pick them up before they go away.
collecting RAW Topps baseball cards 1952 Highs to 1972. looking for collector grade (somewhere between psa 4-7 condition). let me know what you have, I'll take it, I want to finish sets, I must have something you can use for trade.
looking for Topps 71-72 hi's-62-53-54-55-59, I have these sets started
<< <i>I'm an attorney in real life, but only play one here in the boards. That said, you generally cannot use someone's image or likeness for profit or gain without their permission.
/s/ JackWESQ >>
Jack - if I'm correct this comes under the concept of Right to Publicity or intellectual property rights - or personal property rights?
What some may find interesting is that the precedent set by the court which defined the idea of "right to publicity" (as opposed to right of privacy) stemmed from a landmark decision involving Haelen Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum Company in 1953.
In essence the judge said - that signing a waiver of right of privacy to allow one's likeness on a baseball card e.g. - is actually a "right to publicity" - so no one else has a right to use that likeness without the express consent of the individual. Topps tried to argue that a waiver of the right to privacy as signed by a ballplayer for Bowman, e.g., is not transferable - so they felt they had a right to use the likeness.
So - our hobby has had an influence on legal rights still being applied today.
mike
edit: I think he did a fantastic job BTW.
He has received all Positives from the buyers thus far.
Sooner or later someone is going to think they are legit cards.
he also has a crappy DSR for Item as described.
Not sure what to make of that.
Steve
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>He could also do cards that should've been like a 1984 Topps Elway as a Colt or a 1987 Fleer Len Bias. >>
I'd like to see a 1976 Merlin Olsen. I never understood why they didn't make that card. They made a 1979 Fran Tarkenton.
I would be more worried about him starting to come up with fakes of legitimate cards
Just don't make fake cards.
Go Phillies
Mark
--------------------------------------------
NFL HOF RC SET
I am just too lazy to pull the trigger and do the PayPal thing.
<< <i>Well I purchased a set of Swann cards just to see what they are made like and what card stock this seller is using. I'll update once I get them. >>
I'd like to own the sets as well.
The paper stock is my only concern.
Please don't forget to let us know what they're like after you recieve them.
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
<< <i>I think he should make cards of current players in the 1952 Topps design to see what they would look like...... Oh wait, Topps puts out 5 sets of those every year. Nevermind. >>
I think you're on to something. Maybe he could also do a Mickey Mantle set with every Topps/Bowman design ever made.
Completed my Clemente Basic Registry (2007 - 2014)!
Positive transactions with oakesy25,jasoneggert,swartz1,MBMiller25,gregm13,kid4hof03,HoopGuru33,Reese3333,BPorter26,Davemri,CuseSteve,Geoff76
<< <i>Just wondering - why were there no more Lynn Swann cards after 1977 Topps? Some type of licensing dispute? >>
Exactly. Same with Earl Campbell also.
<< <i>
<< <i>Just wondering - why were there no more Lynn Swann cards after 1977 Topps? Some type of licensing dispute? >>
Exactly. Same with Earl Campbell also. >>
And Joe Namath after 1973.
Steve
<< <i>Well I purchased a set of Swann cards just to see what they are made like and what card stock this seller is using. I'll update once I get them. >>
Did you get them yet?
Please don't get me wrong, these cards are great and a lot of effort went into getting the fonts and colors just right. However, no one is going to be fooled. They have a very flat finish (no gloss) and photo resolution is lower than the real thing, which makes the picture appear slightly fuzzy. They kinda look like a picture of a card. They are not on card stock. The tan color of the reverse is just that - a color. It appears that he prints the fronts and backs on two individual pieces and then glues or sticks them together.
Again, I applaude the effortand I'm satisfied with the quality - I gave him positive feedback. I wasn't expecting old school printing.
Let me know if you'd like a scan.
Mike
Thanks for the update!
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Edit- I would love to see a few scans!
If anyone would like the Oilers cards from the Campbell set, PM me your address and they're free to the first person to ask. (The Oilers cards have been claimed).
allen-make sure you put a tack hole throught it
<< <i>This one is really good from the Campbell set.
As a kid I was most upset that Topps did not have Campbell cards after 1979. I would have loved to have this one, especially being a Saints fan.