masterlogan2000

Here's a link to a previous thread posted in 2017.

My comments were in reference to @adampasz's question on a hypothetical situation. However, I agree with you that for the AOC comic, there is strong evidence to support fair use. If anything, DC's actions just put this book on the map.

There are snippets of information here that can help us arrive at the answer, which is... it's not so black and white. The comic can still be protected under fair use, but it depends on the actual use and focus of the photo in question. For instance, is the character dressed up, but shown in the background? Or, is the Wonder Woman the prominent figure on display on the cover? Is this an homage of sorts? Satire, perhaps? Or, is this a blatant attempt to use the Wonder Woman IP to sell more of your hypothetical comic? These are a small sampling of the factors that the lawyers can argue in court.

I've been tracking the Wolverine books for some time. I don't have visual evidence, but do have anecdotal references of the respective Australian prices of the books below. These are issues that are currently missing from your spreadsheet. Wolverine (1988) 60 - $2.65 AUS 61 - $2.65 AUS 66 - $2.65 AUS 69 - $2.80 AUS 70 - $2.80 AUS 72 - $2.80 AUS 74 - $2.80 AUS 100 - $4.90 AUS If you're looking for visual proof, definitely keep an eye out for these particular issues. I'm sure there's even more Wolverine to be found (particularly all the issues in the 60s), but this is a great starting point and helped me fill out some of my own documentation.

Your initial statement implied that "using the visual" would be the trademark violation. I was simply pointing out that this does technically constitute a violation, but that the sale of the merchandise itself was the more egregious violation. Regardless, I think we're on the same page here.

Above is the cover of Grimm Tales of Terror #5. (In case anyone is interested, this is the WW Philly variant by Ale Garza, limited to 350 copies.) I'm just not sure what the difference is here. Did DC go after Zenescope and attempt to force them to pulp all these copies? What about all the artist that sell prints featuring Wonder Woman (or any DC character for that matter)? It'd be nice to have some consistency, but it seems there's a bit of a double standard here. Assuming DC is doing this to distance themselves and their characters from the political landscape, it's ironic that they've thrust themselves into the forefront of this whole argument. Similarly, this is probably the BEST thing that could have happened to Devil's Due. This comic is one of the hottest books out there right now, all because DC was trying to bully them around. DC probably should have just left this alone or at least been smarter about how they handled it. Then again, maybe all this promotion was the plan all along.

Correct. You have a case of trademark violation if the visual used to sell the merchandise is unrelated to the merchandise itself. Though technically still a trademark violation, the bigger issue in this example would be the sale of the merchandise itself if it were unlicensed. This charge would likely trump the trademark violation charge of showing a visual of the unlicensed merchandise that was actually being sold.

No, because Rubie's is licensed by DC, Marvel, etc. https://www.rubies.com/licensed-themes.html?view=all This is still fair use, but a published picture of someone dressed in the costume has nothing to do with the licensing to Rubie's. The licensing only comes into play if there was no agreement in place, but that would be an argument between DC and Rubie's, not between DC and the photo publisher or DC and the costume wearer.

Ha! Of course, you posted Rule 13 right before I finished up submitting my post. Though I still contend that there are way more market factors at play than what we could easily , I will contend that "Rule 13" is closer to true than "Rule 31". Now we're on the same page. I just worry that someone will take these numbers and run with them as if it were the law of the land or use it as definitive proof to argue their point against preview books. The comics market is a much more complex animal than this.

@valiantman, I always enjoy your statistical analysis, but c'mon... you should know better than equating rarity to the amount of submissions on the CGC census. Otherwise that Darkhawk #45 with one submission on the census sure does look quite rare. Better yet, the #46 has ZERO books submitted, which makes that even RARER!!! This is clearly the case where the demand for Action Comics #1 has driven up the price of the book, and both the demand and the price of the book has driven the number of submissions to CGC. I can't believe that even needs to be argued here. At first I thought this thread was going to be full of satire, but it's pretty clear by the tone of each of the posts that the arguments for a Rule #31 are completely serious. Forget that we're talking about the most iconic comic of all time. Forget that we're looking at a pricing model dictated as a simple 3-variable formula, despite the actual market being dictated by a near infinite number of factors. This is the case where a specific example and a handpicked trio of variables are being used to prove some sort of point on why previews should be worth less than an arguable first appearance. Action #1 would and should be considered the exception to any sort of logic or equation. It's in its own class entirely. Rules don't apply to this book, so you therefore can't derive a rule from this book either.

That echo sure is strong here. Glad to see we can reach an agreement on something.

No. The Pressman books are well documented. Uncanny X-Men #297 Uncanny X-Men #303 Uncanny X-Men #307 X-Men (Vol 2) #11 The only one that is never talked about, either because people don't know about it or don't care (I'm guessing mostly the latter), is the X-Men: Survival Guide to the Mansion issue. That came packed in one of the board games.

Well, you can find one here for $0.25 + shipping. https://www.ebay.com/itm/The-Uncanny-X-Men-295-See-Photos-For-Condition/153494733666?hash=item23bcffc362:g:LksAAOSwAdtc19cD I also checked my copies. All of the UXM #295 issues had a Pressman ad on the back cover.

I don't think this is in dispute. In fact, it is in eBay's best interest to have the buyer and seller work something out, as they then get to keep their commission. However, when a full refund and return is the agreed upon path (which was the case here), eBay practically requires that the buyer file a return claim. Only through the claim process can the buyer guarantee, with the support and backing of eBay, that they will get their money back. (Seller protection is another story and quite laughable, but I won't go into details here). Make no mistake about the verbiage in the above screenshot. "Just request a refund" is the first step of the claims process.

Unfortunately, the only way to safely get a return on eBay these days is to go through their "File a claim" system. IIRC, even if you simply click the "I want to contact the seller", the option for "Item not as described" AUTOMATICALLY files the claim... even if you simply wanted to talk it out with the seller. I get your points about exacting revenge as not a good reason for filing a claim... however, the claim process may have been inevitable. EVERYONE is telling you to leave a negative here. Not one person has disagreed. However, have you contacted the seller again to ask him why he has misrepresented the book in the new listing? Have you given him a chance to make the listing right? It is possible that the seller simply auto-relisted the book and forgot to change the description. It's also possible that he's purposefully misrepresenting the comic. Unless you have the answer to that question (or if the seller outright ignores that request), I wouldn't feel comfortable with leaving him a negative. You've already outed the seller here on the boards, so people are more than free to decide on their own if they want to add him to their own block lists. However, IMO, giving the seller the chance to make the listing right should be your first move. (Afterall, part of the goal here may be to help protect the next buyer.) His response can then dictate what you do from there.

This is a very good breakdown, but you forgot to factor in all the time you are spending here arguing about why this is a great deal.

I will definitely pass along anyone's name that is interested once I decide how much of the collection I am taking. DO NOT DO THIS! One quick peek at this thread and the seller (your co-worker) may start regretting his decision. It may alter his perception of what kind of money he thinks he is leaving on the table, which will then alter the relationship you have with him moving forward. This has potential to create a lot of animosity between the two of you. By inviting him here, even by passing along names, you're just asking for trouble. If you value your relationship with this co-worker, it's probably best if you do everything you can to ensure he doesn't come across this thread.

One recently sold on eBay for $2500 (9.6 SS by Campbell and Lee), which I thought was a steal. I only know of this because the buyer of that auction immediately reached out to me unsolicited to try to flip it for a quick profit. I guess he saw some of my auctions and knew I'm a big time Wolverine fan. Looking at more recent auctions, there have been Blue labels that have sold for even more. Great book!

This seems a bit dramatic to me, as I'm sure this will be proven false in the very near future. (At the very least, when the calendar strikes 2020, this will definitely be a false statement ) Have you come here for support, or are you coming here to vent frustrations? I assume the latter, as no details have been provided on the former. Regardless, if you haven't already attempted any troubleshooting, you should try combinations of refreshing, reloading, updating, and switching your internet browser. In my experience, the USPS website doesn't like old cache/cookies, and it dropped support for older browsers last month (or maybe the month before). In my experience, Chrome works better than Firefox, which works better than Edge. If all that fails, a little patience goes a long way. I highly doubt we'll go the remainder of 2019 without having a means of shipping internationally outside of going into a post office.

^ ^ This ^ ^ I've been pretty vocal in the past about about some of the posters in the Modern section, as some people like to abuse the system. One seller opening one thread for a handful of cheap $3 Spideys, then another for a bucket of $2 Batmans... all that drek belongs in one thread. But, "reasonable" is a relative term, and set against the backdrop of the mental state of some of these boardies... well, anything goes really. Clarify the rule. Make it a hard "One open sales thread per Board member per section". In fact, you may even be able to enforce this by requiring any of the other open sales threads to be checked as "Closed" first before allowing another new sales thread post into each section.

I think it's been pretty well established thus far in the thread that each pack contains the visible, exclusive Walmart variant on top with the other two hidden books being completely random.

OP, you're also making an assumption that there are CGC signings taking place right at the moment that the witness is standing 15 feet away. If, based on your two photos, you can prove that a CGC signing is happening WITHOUT the presence of a CGC witness AND those books were still successfully submitted to the Signature Series program, then I think you may have a legitimate concern. However, I don't believe those two photos are enough to paint that picture. Forgive me for my skepticism (with this being your lone post on these boards) about you not trying to rock the boat a bit... but as others have said, if you have a concern, you should bring it up with CGC. Instead of snapping a pic, you could have engaged the witness with this exact question or even approached the CGC booth.

And these all came from just the Captain Marvel packs you opened? I'm trying to clarify if these are prepacked with the same books (for instance, the MCP #1 pack ALWAYS contains second printings of Iron Fist #74 and Weapon X #4), or if the two extras are random books from around the same time period. My guess is the latter, which is likely based on your post.

Paging @I like pie as I believe he's opened a couple of the Captain Marvel packs and may have some insight as to what books were included in those.

Unless something has changed, only the Walmart Super Stores were getting these (and the DC comics) packs. Some Walmarts have moved these displays to their own endcaps (telling me that sales may be strong), but most stores keep them in checkout aisle #1 by the Magic, Pokemon, and sports cards. I'm assuming you're referring to Artgerm's Twitter for the "2 copies per store", but I'm not entirely sure that that's accurate. Someone else may need to chime in for a definitive answer, but I believe I've seen more than 2 copies of certain packs in the past. My guess is that these all come ordered in a display box as 2 per each issue, but it's up to each Walmart to decide how many display boxes they carry. New display boxes with newer issues get released probably once every month or two. The bottom line is that there's no easy or foolproof way to determine the print run here. The only things that have been determined, going by what @PKJ stated, are that these are "pay for scan" in the Walmart system. From my understanding, this means Walmart only "purchases" each individual pack from the vendor at the time that they actually sell each individual pack to the consumer. This means that other than taking up shelf space and potential theft, there is no liability to Walmart. I'm not sure what this means for unsold stock (does it get returned, destroyed, discounted, or continue to sit on the shelf?). Note that "pay for scan" has nothing to do with print runs or the ability to re-order (if that's even possible) and again, does not directly address what happens to unsold stock.