What exactly is a hand signed replica?

I ask because, despite its concern for authenticity, eBay seems to know and is OK with it.

There is a current listing for a big signer from Game of Thrones that is approaching $100. It's not on an RA card, but it looks like it could be. I would call it a decent custom with an HBO logo.

The heading includes "hand signed replica". The description includes the line "Please note this is hand signed with black felt for collectors of game of thrones memorabilia (replica only)".

How confusing this may be to some buyers I couldn't say, but here's my beef with eBay. They continually allow sellers to use the term "hand signed" on autographed items that don't have autographs. A pre-print isn't hand signed. A facsimile isn't hand signed. And as far as I know a replica, although I rarely hear that word used for autographs, isn't hand signed either.

So why does eBay allow confusing and contradictory words to be used in descriptions for autographed items that are either hand signed (presumably by the genuine person) or are reproductions (achieved by any means) of an original signature?

Hand signed means hand signed. People shouldn't have to try to figure out from the rest of the page if it's really a copied autograph and eBay should be responsible to remove conflicting descriptions in my opinion. Any other words you don't like to see put together on eBay card sales?

These types of cards drive me crazy.

The seller has a ton of cards from 'Preeminence Collectors Card Company.'

The card has a copyright, uses logos for Game of Thrones and HBO has trademark symbols and appears to match the design used by Rittenhouse.

Is this a licensed product? As a consumer I'm confused if this is a legitimate product or not.

If it isn't legitimate it is up to Rittenhouse, HBO and other rights holders to put a stop to it.

I personally steer clear if copyrights/trademarks are in question.

The seller is also selling legitimate Rittenhouse cards. . . and Preeminence branded Star Wars cards.

Yes, unlicensed cards on eBay is another issue that divides card buyers. Some see nothing wrong with them and that's their decision. I'd like to think that card collectors know all the reasons why nothing good comes of buying unlicensed product that's violating another's property license.

However, I concur that it is up to the copyright holders to protect those licenses that they have spent a small fortune to obtain. I don't believe it's the responsibility of collectors to police auction sites if the existing license holders don't care enough to complain themselves.

My gripe here is with eBay for not cleaning up descriptions on autographed items that muddy the true nature of the signature. It shouldn't be so hard to distinguish an actual hand-signed signature from a reproduced copy. By just saying "hand signed" it literarily means hand signed and not mechanically reproduced by pre-print, facsimile, autopen, stamp, replica, or any other manner of copying an autograph image.

If eBay is so concerned with the authentication of high dollar autograph cards, it should also hold sellers accountable to accurately describe, not just that the autograph is genuine as an image on cheaper items, but that it really is a hand signed autograph in the first place.

Hahaha! My favorite is "all rights reserved" So is this design directly lifted from a RA card? Doesn't look familiar. Can't be a replica if it isn't. Has an unsigned Jason Momoa as well.

This looks like a custom which means the buyer wont know the quality until they get it.

Ebay has entirely too many listing options and cross linked international sales to adequately police something like this. Misrepresented signatures are routinely sold to buyers who refuse to get educated about their hobby. If an auction is confusing then ask questions of the seller or don't buy.

I have gotten into it with a few custom card makers who use (even fake) licensing information. It would be nice if celebrities would generally refuse to sign items with questionable copyright and logo information on them. With some exception no one should be handing them unsigned licensed cards.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
It would be nice if celebrities would generally refuse to sign items with questionable copyright and logo information on them.

That means that hardly any customs would get signed.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
It would be nice if celebrities would generally refuse to sign items with questionable copyright and logo information on them.

That means that hardly any customs would get signed.

Not if you make your customs without legal, licensing, manufacture or media distribution logos.

I get you could argue that the images are copyrighted but I think personal use laws offer some protection in that area. If I hand a celebrity 2 or 3 different customs that is a bit different than dropping 50 or a 100 which would obviously indicate some level of business.

In most cases the cost of making the card, getting to the con and paying for the signature will be more than what it will sell for. I know I would have to make quite a bit of money for my custom collection to break even.

Main thing is there is nothing on them to indicate a legitimate licensed set. Plus I think it is more fun to come up with my own designs and not rip off what someone else has already done. Although the RA full bleed cards are so ridiculously simple it can be difficult not to accidently copy it from time to time.

I wasn't really talking about unlicensed custom cards when I brought up this issue of a "hand signed replica". I was talking about descriptions of autograph cards on eBay that you have to dissect word by word to try to figure out if the thing was really signed by anybody or was just "pretend" signed. I blame eBay for not putting in a rule, among its many rules, that sellers can't use words as loopholes and have to state definitively whether an autograph is hand signed by the actual person or has been artificially reproduced or copied in any manner, so that it is not an actual signature signed by that person. It should be pretty simple to tell people what you are selling.

Custom cards on eBay is a different subject.

Some of them do have authenticate autographs. Some of them have reproduced autographs. Some of them display logos that they have no rights to carry. Some of them don't infringe on other licensed companies. Some of them look like garbage and some of them are very well done. Some of them prominently declare that they are custom made. Some of them seem to try to make you guess and some of them don't say a word about it. But the mere fact that they are all up on eBay is a problem that is growing.

i have noticed that custom cards on eBay have become a "cottage industry" within a fairly short time. A lot of them claim to have authentic autographs and many of them are achieving that through what they claim are authentic "cut" signatures. Look around and some of the really big stars have custom made autograph cards. The selling price is way less than their licensed certified autograph cards, but they aren't cheap either. So what gives with this?

Well, again if eBay is so concerned about authenticity, it should probably take a look at what is being sold as custom cards on its platform. I don't know if eBay would put many custom autographed cards through its authenticity program, but few might qualify for it by the price point or by description. Custom cards by their nature are meant for the enjoyment of the collector and/or maker and are not mass produced for sale.

Well, they are certainly easy to find on eBay now, so someone is cranking them out. As a personal hobby I see nothing wrong with creating custom cards, with or without autographs. However if they are being made in quantity for the sole purpose of sale, then it becomes a business with a lot of questions and problems. Again I blame eBay for not minding the store, but taking the fees any way.

BTW, the "hand signed replica" ended at $125.50.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
BTW, the "hand signed replica" ended at $125.50.

Seller definitely lost money if they were the ones who submitted the card. Last year Twin Cities Con had $250 for the low end Clarke signature.

Let me say up front -- I've got no problems personally with custom cards. Some of them are very nice, and I've got some ideas about making some that I'd like to follow up on myself (I want a Deadwood set . . . ).

But: 95% or more of all customs I've seen have, at least, a screen shot of a copyrighted movie or TV show. Most of them have a logo from the show, which would be copyrighted and often trademarked. The people being pictured have the right to control the use of their images. And "legitimate" manufacturers have paid a lot of money for exclusive rights to make licensed sets. Buy a custom Star Trek card, and Rittenhouse is one of the companies you are stealing from. Custom cards, in terms of licenses and intellectual property, are dumpster fires.

That doesn't mean, however, that it's ebay's job to police them. Like all IP, it is the job of the copyright/license owner to protect their work. Since they are so overtly advertised, I think that the licensors/licensees and the actors involved don't really care.

Raven -- are you suggesting that in the case of the Emilia Clarke card under discussion that the autograph is pre-printed? or is forged?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
Raven -- are you suggesting that in the case of the Emilia Clarke card under discussion that the autograph is pre-printed? or is forged?

No, I don't make judgements about things that are not in my hand and even then, it is my opinion for myself alone.

What I will tell you is that the word "replica" bothered me. I really don't know what that means here. And also, I'd say that I cannot tell from just a scan if an autograph is on-card or in-card.

The item in question did not have a "cut" signature insert. Mykdude is correct about the cost of getting that particular autograph at a private signing. It would be more like $275 - $300 if it were fan obtained. I don't know who made the card, but it wasn't RA because the description named some other company.

I honestly don't know what it was. Hence the question, what exactly is a hand signed replica?

I've been thinking on this question a day or so. I'm not sure we'll ever know, but it could be a replica of a Rittenhouse card, then hand signed. So the card is a printed off custom/copy/replica, but the autograph is real. But who knows? "Replica " is certainly an odd word in there.

Having listed and sold some things on ebay recently it has become so ridiculous with how many boxes you have to check. Selling other collectables as well as cards, I spent a lot of wasted minutes repeating the same info in multiple boxes to answer the same category questions asked in a slightly different way. It gets to a point where you question yourself just what the heck am I trying to sell here? ebay were supposed to be making things simpler and faster to list things...NOT my experience, recently.
Even so, that card listing is plain weird wording.

I think this from the copylaw site is one of the more clear definitions.

"While "fair use" can't be defined with mathematical precision, courts have consistently held that "you cannot escape liability by showing how much of [a] work you did not take." Based on the particular facts of a given case, courts will weight the following factors to determine whether a particular use is a fair use: (i) the purpose of the use, including whether the use is primarily for commercial or noncommercial purposes; (ii) the nature of the work; (iii) the amount and importance of the portions used in relation to the whole of the original work; and (iv) the effect of the use on the potential market, or value of the original. Accordingly, even if what you copy is quantitatively small, it may be qualitatively important, and therefore an infringing use."

Some examples I can think of that should qualify

- Direct replicas of licensed cards (or just using the license information) infringe on the manufacture, the license holder and collectors respectively.
- Using images and titles in a manner that damages the show's reputation.
- If custom cards somehow impeded a licensed manufacture from producing and selling their product or entered into active competition. Currently this is not happening.
- A custom maker produces many copies and earns a profit as a business. I am pretty sure Phantom Cardboard received a cease and desist order as they no longer offer cards for sale. He sill posts his designs on line.
- According to other copyright laws even if a manufacturer (Inkworks) and a title (Jericho) are considered no more one could still be sued for copyright infringement.

Honest "fair use" even if it could be considered infringement, generally falls in that area of not worth pursuing.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
It would be more like $275 - $300 if it were fan obtained. I don't know who made the card, but it wasn't RA because the description named some other company.

Yeah, I have seen some of these clowns basically invent their own name and dress it up as licensing info. One had his fantasy name right next to Lucas Films LLC on a Star Wars Natalie Portman cut.

I think some of them unintentionally just want that added authentic look but I called him out on it and he seemed to get what I was saying about confusing collectors.

It is certainly confusing wording, and perhaps purposefully so.

Ultimately I don't think eBay would take any action unless a rights holder contacted them about the card.

It would be interesting though to see what would happen if this were sent through the authentication program.

Rittenhouse and Topps may be interested in these GoT and Star Wars cards. If the cards are problematic I think they are the parties to intervene.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
It would be more like $275 - $300 if it were fan obtained. I don't know who made the card, but it wasn't RA because the description named some other company.

Yeah, I have seen some of these clowns basically invent their own name and dress it up as licensing info. One had his fantasy name right next to Lucas Films LLC on a Star Wars Natalie Portman cut.

I think some of them unintentionally just want that added authentic look but I called him out on it and he seemed to get what I was saying about confusing collectors.

A Google search produced no information or website for the card maker named, except for a couple of other eBay items.

Since it was created as an autograph card, not as a card that got signed later, the assumption would be that the guarantee of authenticity would lie somewhere in the production process. But if you don't know where to find the maker, well you can see the problem.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
It would be more like $275 - $300 if it were fan obtained. I don't know who made the card, but it wasn't RA because the description named some other company.

Yeah, I have seen some of these clowns basically invent their own name and dress it up as licensing info. One had his fantasy name right next to Lucas Films LLC on a Star Wars Natalie Portman cut.

I think some of them unintentionally just want that added authentic look but I called him out on it and he seemed to get what I was saying about confusing collectors.

A Google search produced no information or website for the card maker named, except for a couple of other eBay items.

Since it was created as an autograph card, not as a card that got signed later, the assumption would be that the guarantee of authenticity would lie somewhere in the production process. But if you don't know where to find the maker, well you can see the problem.

Sorry that one went right over my head. You can't google a fake card maker.

Aren't all autograph cards signed later...after they are created?

The only guarantee the auction in question can provide is that it is a card and Emilia signed it. Interestingly enough no authenticating information on the signature is provided. Doesn't even offer a third party authentication guarantee. Every red flag is waving high on this one I have no sympathy for the buyer if in fact they were fooled.

Don't get me wrong I have seen some stuff that should at the very least prompt Rittenhouse to request Ebay to remove the item. Some have been authenticated. Check this one out

https://www.ebay.com/itm/28513...rksid=p2047675.l2557

You can't get much more deliberate than this. Beckett should have looked at this and immediately refused to put their sticker on it.

Maybe that is where the battle lines should be drawn? Card Manufacturers suing Authentication companies for allowing obvious items like this through. At this stage it's not happening enough to impact the bottom line for either group as they sweep in tons of bucks from collectors.

Personally I think if custom card makers knew that there were certain things that would prevent their card from being authenticated they would probably stop.

Compared to this one which is from a set that never existed.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/14496...rksid=p2047675.l2557

Bill is technically correct that it is still using copyright titles and images but my interpretation is a one and done falls under fair use. There is nothing here that promotes or deceives anyone to think it is a legitimate publication. Most of the sale price is tied up in the autograph and materials.

It is interesting that his customs without license info sold for much less than the three he sold with it. Also they are the only three with Beckett Authentication.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/14496...tkp%3ABk9SR4rGopX6YQ

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,