divad

Sounds like a high print run to me. That's a boat-full

Ain't that always the case?

The copyright date is the "creation" date, and is marked by year only. It is not necessarily the "publication" date.

Does that make this the 2nd App???

No, neither, but I'm a huge small press fan (and I do like beer every now and then).

Great book! Here's my copy:

If you don't have this already, there's still time to get in the back door before the Netflix deal is known to everyone. I've always been a big fan of Jessica's Let me know when she's reallllllly hot.

So, like, how, would, you, even, know?

Which, of course, is why I always set the auction starting price which I as a seller will accept. I may not sell as much as the next guy, but I have a lot of happy clients. The alternative way I list is using the BIN/BO method. I don't need to sell any more books, I'm happy selling one-a-day

Nor I (and I even own several)

No one really bids until the last 10 seconds . . .

Been one of the most overlooked BA/CA book in years. I sell NM raw copies for $50 all day long. I bet I have sold a dozen in the last 2 years they don't last long ever. Very easy sell in any grade almost. Love to hear this type of stuff . . .

Absolutely correct.

Agreed. This stylistically reeks of CA

Yep, that should cover about 1 month of kindergarten

+1 So what does it take to be a comic ? Is an ashcan a comic ? How about Farlaine ? That book is oversized and opens the wrong way. I'm just having fun with you. I just don't see CGC as defining what is and what is not a comic. Precisely. Under the rules expressed by the naysayers here, Mouse Guard certainly doesn't qualify as a comic . . .

Publication (as to commercially available items, e.g., periodicals and serial publications) means the date of first distribution for sale. I would posit that the DC legal filer was not necessarily diligent in his work. The Marvel dates I showed as an exemplar are consistent with the 2-3 month (or more) lag date we have always observed regarding sale date vs. cover date (and indicia for that matter.)

+1 So what does it take to be a comic ? Is an ashcan a comic ? How about Farlaine ? That book is oversized and opens the wrong way. I'm just having fun with you. I just don't see CGC as defining what is and what is not a comic. Precisely. Under the rules expressed by the naysayers here, Mouse Guard certainly doesn't qualify as a comic . . .

Twice actually:

divad, what is your beef with me? That Wiki link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_date explains exactly what the cover date is and why it is a few months in the future of the release date. Seriously, I've cited my information and didn't throw out incorrect facts like "vendors could return any unsold book to the distributor after 30-days for full credit." If you read the Wiki link, Paul Levitz's book, 75 Years of DC Comics: The Art of Modern Mythmaking" is one of the entries sources. I think the former editor and president of DC knows a thing or 2 about why the cover date is what it is. Where is your source for that "fact" you mentioned? How about, I was there.

rj, you should evaluate the source of data before quoting it. Your wiki cite is a joke too.

Now, Meck is on the right track.

I don't purport to know the answer, but I am pretty sure that "publication" in a copyright filing need not be the day a book hit the stands, thought it can be: “Publication” is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. The offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display constitutes publication. Under this definition (from the copyright office) "publication" also means that merely OFFERING the work for sale for further distribution to the public can be considered publication. So, in this case when shops got Previews? Dunno how the tape/combo would be sold to stores (and I am assuming this doesn't mean "offering" to the distributor..but it might?) So now we don't have a clear cut answer as to what hit the shelves first. Well, this thread has been nothing if not informative. I just read through some of the Copyright Basics found on the http://www.copyright.gov/ website. From the section titled "Copyright Registration": "In general, copyright registration is a legal formality intended to make a public record of the basic facts of a particular copy­right. However, registration is not a condition of copyright protection. Even though registration is not a requirement for protection, the copyright law provides several inducements or advantages to encourage copyright owners to make regis­tration. Among these advantages are the following: • Registration establishes a public record of the copyright claim. • Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, regis­tration is necessary for works of U. S. origin. • If made before or within five years of publication, regis­tration will establish prima facie evidence in court of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the certificate. • If registration is made within three months after publica­tion of the work or prior to an infringement of the work, statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an award of actual damages and profits is available to the copyright owner. • Registration allows the owner of the copyright to record the registration with the U. S. Customs Service for pro­tection against the importation of infringing copies. For additional information, go to the U. S. Customs and Border Protection website at www.cbp.gov/. Registration may be made at any time within the life of the copyright. Unlike the law before 1978, when a work has been registered in unpublished form, it is not necessary to make another registration when the work becomes published, although the copyright owner may register the published edition, if desired." To summarize, there are benefits to registering your copyright, but it is not mandatory. Depending on when you register, you are given different advantages (basically, the earlier you register, the more copyright protection you are afforded.) This corresponds with what I'm seeing as I lookup different comics found on Comichron's monthly lists and when they are "registered" and "published" in the Copyright registration database. Basically, I'm seeing as much as a 3 months difference in some "publish" dates in the Copyright registration database versus what Comichron is reporting (which is the data Diamond is reporting monthly.) Some of the "published" dates are spot on (month/year) with the Diamond dates and other dates are not. Unfortunately, I don't think the Copyright registration database is a reliable source for knowing which book was published first. Meckler is correct that we don't know which came first. I'll use Batman Adventures 30 itself to illustrate the point about the Copyright registration database being unreliable. According to Diamond (from http://www.comichron.com/monthlycomicssales/1995/1995-01Diamond.html), Batman Adventures 30 was released in January 1995: 116 Batman Adventures 30 $1.50 DC 32.2 And, according to the Copyright registration database, we have: Type of Work: Serial Title: The Batman Adventures. Serial Publication Year: 1995 Description: print material. Frequency: Monthly. Publication History: [No.] 1, Oct. 1992- Copyright Claimant: DC Comics, Inc. Issues Registered: no. 29, Feb95. Created 1994; Pub. 1995-01-03; Reg. 1995-01-25; TX0003977103 no. 30, Mar95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-02-07; Reg. 1995-02-27; TX0003999859 no. 31, Apr95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-03-07; Reg. 1995-03-27; TX0003843164 no. 32, Jun95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-04-04; Reg. 1995-04-14; TX0004016765 no. 33, Jul95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-05-02; Reg. 1995-05-19; TX0004044581 no. 34, Aug95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-06-06; Reg. 1995-06-20; TX0004066705 no. 35, Sep95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-07-04; Reg. 1995-07-25; TX0004076866 no. 36, Oct95. Created 1995; Pub. 1995-08-01; Reg. 1995-09-01; TX0004129262 Basis of Claim: New matter: additions. Names: DC Comics, Inc. So, the book was distributed in January 1995 according to Diamond, but was published in February 1995 according to the Copyright registration database. I've seen other books off by as much as 3 months in the Copyright registration database when compared to the Diamond charts. No offense, but you're completely wrong on just about everything you have stated. Comichron is not associated with Diamond in any way shape or form: Domain Name: COMICHRON.COM Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com Updated Date: 2011-11-01 16:36:24 Creation Date: 2006-11-11 14:55:24 Registrar Expiration Date: 2013-11-11 14:55:24 Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC Registrant Name: John Jackson Miller Registrant Organization: Faraway Press Registrant Street: P.O. Box 525 Registrant City: Waupaca Registrant State/Province: Wisconsin Registrant Postal Code: 54981 Registrant Country: United States

For example, here are some issue and publication dates for Uncanny X-Men from 1982: Type of Work: Serial Title: The Uncanny X-Men / [Marvel Comics Group]. Serial Publication Year: 1982 Serial Key Title: The Uncanny X-Men Imprint: New York : The Group. ISSN: 0274-5372 Description: print material. Frequency: Monthly. Continues: X-Men. Description based on: Vol. 1, no. 121, May 1979. Copyright Claimant: Marvel Comics Group, a division of Cadence Industries Corporation. Authorship on Application: text & ill.: Marvel Comics Group, a division of Cadence Industries Corporation, employer for hire. Issues Registered: v. 1, no. 161, Sep82. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-05-18; Reg. 1983-05-31; TX0001130119 v. 1, no. 162, Oct82. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-06-15; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001149240 v. 1, no. 163, Nov82. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-07-20; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001148867 v. 1, no. 164, Dec82. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-08-17; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001148800 v. 1, no. 165, Jan83. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-09-21; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001150634 v. 1, no. 166, Feb83. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-10-19; Reg. 1983-07-25; TX0001164904 v. 1, no. 167, Mar83. Created 1982; Pub. 1982-11-16; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001154776 v. 1, no. 168, Apr83. Created 1983; Pub. 1982-12-21; Reg. 1983-06-20; TX0001137928 Names: Cadence Industries Corporation. Marvel Comics Group Marvel Comics Group, a division of Cadence Industries Corporation

This was never the original reason . . . Issue dates never matched distribution dates, and this goes way back (to at least the mid-sixties). This is why books were often date-stamped by the newsstand vendor. The vendor didn't want to keep old books on the shelves, they wanted only the newest books to sell to their customers. Before the direct market, vendors could return any unsold book to the distributor after 30-days for full credit. I don't understand how this idea ever got turned around and seen as a benefit to the vendor - vendors hated it. Of course, 1993 was well into the direct market period. Copyright filings, however, attempt to be as accurate as possible by the copyright claimant, and statements filed are made under the penalty of perjury. I'm not vouching for whomever made these filings, but those that I have personally filed were always accurate.