FFB

It's a derivative work because 99% of the item is Marvel's copyrighted content and Marvel has the right to control how its copyrighted content is presented, marketed and sold. Imagine if, instead of the acetate cover they used, they added an acetate cover with naked women in suggestive poses, etc., over a Marvel book. The law allows Marvel to prohibit the retailer from marketing its content along with the retailer-created add-on. Someone else made the excellent point that there are also trademark issues, because there is a strong likelihood of confusion as to the source of origin of the item. The point was also made that this likely violates a clause in Marvel's contract with the retailer for the original, approved exclusive that went unsold and got turned into the acetate monstrosity.

It is still infringement if you create a derivative work, which this most certainly is. And Marvel will probably send a C&D letter because these publishers are accustomed to doing exactly that every time someone infringes a trademark or copyright. It doesn't matter how much money the person made; they do it as a matter of course. We're likely concerned with copyright infringement here, but for trademark infringement, you have to send a C&D letter or you may risk losing or weakening your rights in the trademark down the line. Bottom line is that the amount of money made or not made by Black Flag is not going to be a determining factor in whether or not they get a C&D letter. If they pull the acetate versions before the next show, you'll know they got a letter from Marvel.

Yeah, that's what any normal collector would expect and it is the right way to treat these things.

I believe the correct quote is, "The wheels are already in motion."

The author only referenced this thread to make the point that CGC's forum members (us) didn't buy their explanation. The statement about Marvel not authorizing the acetate project and the statement that it isn't something they would approve seems to have come directly from the author's contact with Marvel. Bleeding Cool definitely has deep contacts at Marvel and my suspicion is that the SVP mentioned in the very next sentence (David Gabriel) is the author's source. Judging from his title, SVP Print, Sales and Marketing, that's who I would reach out to if I were Bleeding Cool.

Everyone else is already saying pretty much everything that I think about the situation. There is a big difference between a variant that is approved by the publisher (Stray Dogs) and what happened here, which is some retailer's unwanted variant version of a Facsimile Edition UF 4 being altered after publisher approval and original release by attaching a sheet of acetate to it to make it desirable (when the original, Marvel-approved release didn't sell through), and then marketing the altered book for sale. While I personally do not care about dumb marketing tactics like this, Marvel may care. I'm not certain that what Black Flag did is unlawful, but in my opinion it is an infringement of Marvel's copyright on UF4 if in fact they altered the approved book and then marketed it commercially without getting the alterations approved. But, that's between Black Flag and Marvel. What I do care about is the leading certification company putting its imprimatur on this tactic. This is obviously just a cash grab by CGC and it makes no sense. The damage to the brand has to outweigh whatever grading fees they got from these books. But as bad as this decision is, it's not the most troubling aspect of this situation. The convenient coincidence that the current release and future releases have exactly one 10, 3 9.9s, and 6 9.8s suggests to me that there may be some kind of collusion between CGC and the retailer. As much as I dislike the idea of certifying the acetate add-on versions to begin with, the fact that they are apparently agreeing in advance that a certain number of books will get a 10 or 9.9 is much worse than the decision to certify them in the first place. It suggests that high grades can be for sale. Definitely more transparency is needed here. Do I think we'll get it? Probably not because the answer might be worse than just keeping quiet about it.

I want to make dingdong variants, where I make clear acetate overlays where I add dingdongs to classic covers.

I think it's spelled assatate. You know, because of how it looks.

Right, I'm not calling him out per se. He may very well have been told to say exactly what he said, which, in my opinion, is horrible PR. My comments were directed at the organization as a whole, not at Mike personally.

As someone who has been a member here since before the Wizard First controversy way way back more than 15 years ago, it makes me chuckle how bad you guys STILL are at PR. Yes, I know that this will blow over as soon as the next shiny object floats by (or enough time passes) and it's not going to impact CGC's bottom line. But that isn't the point. The lack of transparency here is exacerbated by your one sentence response. Why even respond at all if you're going to respond like this? It just makes you guys look arrogant and condescending at the same time. Do I care if a bunch of knuckleheads wait in line to buy a facsimile edition UF4 with an aftermarket plastic cover stapled on for $75 or whatever? Absolutely not. I've spent a lot more than that on things that were far more worthless in the short run, let alone the long run. (Every visit I made to a strip club during my 20s stands out as a far worse financial decision at the moment.) But I do care about CGC's integrity, as do most other people who frequent these boards, as well as the thousands of collectors who aren't forum members. Like it or not, you guys are the industry leader in certification, and you certified a facsimile edition with an added-on cover with extra staples. If you guys are going to do questionable things, you really owe it to your customers to give a better explanation of your thinking on the issue. Like I said, it may not impact your bottom line today or even tomorrow, but little things like this add up over time and they aren't good for your company's brand. The least you can do is provide some kind of a rational explanation for why a married cover is getting a blue label. It's obvious that you "stand by it," because the book is in your slab. It's the "Here's why it's OK" that is missing from your response.

Those pictures make me 1000% certain that the book does not have an aftermarket trim. Trying to recreate that on a book and being consistent with all of the interior pages would be basically impossible unless you had the original dulled cutting blade from the factory and were cutting into exceptionally fresh paper. Everyone who collects silver age Marvels has seen dozens or even hundreds of production cuts like this. It's perfectly normal.

I can't wrap my head around how it would be possible to put an aftermarket trim on a book like that.

Add my 2 cents to the "definitely not trimmed" pile.

It was about a VF 8.0 based on the scans. A trimmed 8.0 sold earlier this year for . . . $10,500. It would have taken me 18 years to basically break even.

Jesus, has it really been 18 and a half years since I won that ASM #1 auction from Comic-Keys on ebay and Steve Borock told me to sign up for the boards after telling me it was likely trimmed?

Maybe you were a little, but long-time board members know that I'm not one to hold a grudge. I'll argue with you on these boards until we're blue in the face, but if we run into each other at a Forum Dinner, I'll buy you a drink and we'll hug it out like Vikings.

I wasn't whining, I was discussing what I saw as a CGC grade that's inconsistent with industry grading standards and I gave examples from the most accepted grading guide in the hobby. I accepted that a lot of people agreed with the 3.5, but noted that the standards in the Overstreet guide don't allow that size of a piece missing in VG-. Then you decided to get your panties in a twist because of a light-hearted Big Lebowski reference and here we are. But please, it's a nice, late Friday afternoon. If you are bored and you need someone to keep arguing with, here I am.

My, you're really a drama queen aren't you? Might I recommend some time away from the boards?

Yeah well that's just like your opinion, man. According to every edition of the Overstreet Grading Guide, the highest grade that allows a 1/2 inch triangle to be missing is a 2.5. The GL1 is pretty similar to the Whiz Comics 9 on page 250 of the current edition of the Grading Guide. According to you, a book can have a chunk like that missing and still score a 7.0 or 7.5 if it's otherwise perfect? I know a lot of other people guessed 3.5 as well, but that just seems crazy to me for this book.

So no one else thinks it's crazy that the Green Lantern #1 with a nearly 1 inch triangle missing from the cover graded a 3.5? That's ridiculous to me.

That's why I gave it a 9.2 also. I would never grade a book a 9.4 with a crease like that, and if I sold a raw book like that as a 9.4 on ebay, it would get returned.

Under no circumstances would I recommend anyone send an important book to Eclipse Paper Conservation. I speak from personal experience after having two books ruined from a simple pressing job that took FOREVER to get back, coupled with excuse after excuse and delay after delay. Tracey talks a big game but his skills do not match up to the top professionals from anything I've seen. As for the Restoration Lab, Susan used to be one of the best back in the 1990s, but her techniques are archaic and I believe she's mostly focused on pressing now. Her piece filling work is nowhere near the quality that is being achieved by the skilled leaf casters these days.