paqart

I hate to do this, but who will be the first on page 400 of this thread?

That is a fair argument and may correctly anticipate Zanello's defense. However, Zanello misrepresented to CGC that the comic in the holder was the same as was originally graded. CGC was sloppy not to check, but Zanello was intending to defraud and made CGC into an unwitting participant, possibly because he was aware of laxity in their reholdering process. That still makes Zanello guilty of counterfeiting, even if he used a third party to do it. Also, regardless of CGC's actions, the result is a counterfeit with a false designation of origin because the comic inside the case is not the comic the grade label belongs to.

That's fine, and my comment isn't meant to take anything away from your work. It's just that an exhibit in a lawsuit is not the same as proving something forensically. I'm going through something like this right now with a book agent. I did some research over the last two years that gained some noteriety, hence the agent. The work was very detailed and involved capturing every nuance of what I found. For the book I'm writing about it, I have to remove almost all the detail so that general readers will understand what I found without having to earn a PhD first. It's frustrating to write this way because I feel like it requires leaving out important details. However, the agent has shown me clear examples why it has to be done this way, not the least of which is a comparison of books with forensic detail that don't do well compared to the extremely simple versions of similar stories that perform extremely well. It comes down to the audience. Now that I think of it, I have a better example. When I was a kid, a friend broke into my house and stole about 30 comics from my collection. I recognized them at his house because of the priice labels on the bags, which were handwritten by a particular dealer at the DeAnza flea market in San Jose. I described this in great detail to the judge, who did not believe I could tell the difference between two identically manufactured comics. The thief's family had their insurance agent at the trial. Though I lost because the judge didn't believe I could distinguish between my comics and someone else's, the insurance agent was persuaded and I got paid through the family's homeowner's insurance.

Now that you mention it, this seems strange to me also. I don't like signatures now, but when I was a kid, I sought them out. I remember asking Jim Starlin to sign on the first page instead of the cover, to not mar the cover, but wouldn't have had him sign a back cover that had no art.

Not sure I agree with you. I'm familiar with putting exhibits together and can say that what they did in the lawsuit was much easier to understand than anything I've seen on this forum. I happen to know what to look for when comparing comics, but it still takes careful examination to find the similarities. The way they're highlighted in the case is much easier to see, is clear, and doesn't require specialist knowledge of what to look for.

Figuring out the scam here is not the same as constructing a tight lawsuit. That's like saying "the actors do all the work" and not crediting the writers, director, cinematographer, etc. That, or the reverse, "the actor didn't do anything, it was all the behind the camera guys who made the movie great."

I believe they were textbook "counterfeit" regardless of your explanation. The reason is that, from the consumer's point of view, they were buying a (for instance) 9.0 IH181 that had an MVS missing, so it was not a legitimate 9.0. The case created the false impression that the IH181 was something it wasn't. The combination of the comic, case, and label is a "counterfeit 9.0 IH181" even if the comic isn't a counterfeit IH181, the case isn't counterfeit, nor is the label. This is why they're suing under the Lanham Act, which covers false designation of origin (which is what I sued Harris Comics, Fox Television, and Chris Carter for), but also such things as falsely labeled knockoff blue jeans or Rolex watches. In the case of blue jeans, the trousers might be real blue jeans and may even be based on the same pattern and use the same materials, but if they weren't made by whoever the label says they were made by (false designation of origin) like Levi's, then they are counterfeit. That is true even if the label itself is genuine, but stripped from another pair of trousers. That is exactly what happened here. Real label, case, and comic, but they don't belong together. It is a false designation of origin because the grade and the comic don't go together. The seller is representing that the 9.0 was assigned to that comic by CGC, but that isn't true. Therefore, false designation of origin.

I was thinking about the SS comics last night. Is it plausible that the signatures are real but they weren't witnessed? Then someone managed to get SS labels and stuck them in SS cases? Were there prior sales to rule that out?

Just for fun, I'm going to do a mental exercise by imagining what I would do if I was a victim. Speaking of which, I still haven't found my CGC ASM 252 I wanted to check against the list. For this exercise, let's say I bought a Stan Lee signed JIM 83 SS label 6.0 for $25k. In reality, it is 3.5 and the signature wasn't witnessed, making it worth about $8k. So, what am I out? The comic or the money? From my point of view, the comic is more important than the money, so that's what I want from CGC, a 6.0 SS Stan Lee signature JIM 83. Instead, they offer FMV. Let's say FMV for the original label is currently $17,500. That wouldn't make me happy because it is a loss of $7,500 and I lose a signed comic. So, I'd ask for $25k. If CGC refused, I'd keep the comic and hand the whole thing over to the FBI. If CGC paid the $25k, I'd probably drop it right there. What happens if the value went up after purchase? If CGC offered to refund my purchase price, but I couldn't afford to replace my comic for what they offered, I'd go straight to law enforcement. What bothers me about the deal offered by CGC is that once I turn it in for evaluation, if it proves to be a swap, I lose the comic and have to accept their terms. If I don't like their terms, I have no negotiating power at all, and can't easily go to law enforcement. For that reason, I think I would go to law enforcement first. I'd tell them what happened, show them the comic and receipts, and ask whether I should go to CGC. They would probably have to go through CGC anyway to validate the story, but now they know what is going on and have their eyes on the case. The bad thing about going straight to law enforcement is that I might not get any reimbursement and the comic would be taken as evidence. With that in mind, maybe I would send it to CGC, but would tell law enforcement about it and document every step, including all communications with CGC. I would swear out a complaint against the 2 perps, regardless whether CGC made me whole.

I get 10 that last round. Big screwup on the Lois Lane, 4 points on that alone. I saw what looked like a ripped spine at the top, gave it a 5.0

Looks like a 1.8 to me.

I disagree on "should." It "can" but there is no reason it has to. Also, one could argue that it "shouldn't" go through CGC. The reason is that the most easily identified victims are the collectors or dealers who bought the counterfeits, not CGC. CGC did suffer reputational harm, but they are dealing with that via their civil lawsuit. If a criminnal case emerges from customer complaints, all of CGC's research will still land on the desks of law enforcement. CGC does not have to initiate a case for that to happen.

There is no reason victims of the fraud can't call the FBI themselves.

I wonder if the CGC strategy is to sue first, so they can hold a criminal complaint over their head, get the info they need, then file criminal case also?

I settled with Fox Television, Chris Carter, and Harris Comics on a Lanham Act trademark case related to their use of a comic I made with James Hudnall used by Fox/Carter as the basis for the TV series "Harsh Realm." The judge (in NY) told defendant's attorneys, "I've looked at the documents and think you have a 99% chance of losing. If you want to try your 1% chance of winning on argument, go ahead, but I suggest you settle." In that case, a "federal trademark case" it wasn't decided on "seems shady" grounds, but I don't think the Riva/Zanello case is simply "seems shady." There is clear intent to defraud. In case you are curious, the settlement terms were ridiculous, but James wanted to settle, so we did.

MY original collection had 4 or 5 of these, but that was in 1979. Long gone now.

I usually get duplicates because they are different, like a UK, Canadian, or US edition, or a price difference, printing errors, etc. Recently, I bought about 1,500 modern newsstand editions. Many worked out as good investments based on value, some didn't I haven't a profit or loss on any of them yet because I don't want to sell after all the trouble it took to find them. Those things are rare! My most disappointing purchase was probably 5 9.8 copies of She-Hulk #1 for $30. I got them because they are all newsstand editions, but didn't realize that there are no direct editions for that issue, so it is nothing special. For a little while, the comics were worth about $300 each, but that has dropped considerably. That's my disappointment, even they're still worth more than the $6/copy I paid..

I just got this for Round 3: I wonder if it is good? My guess is it means, "What were you thinking?" or, "whoops." I hope not, I thought I had done well.

Tied with you and 8 others!

Well spotted. I wouldn't be surprised if that photo was used as reference by the artist.

They might be harder to see but they are visible. I saw them. If you expect a spine split as your baseline for evaluation, it is easier to find.

I had a very hard time with this group. At first, they all looked better than they were, then worse. In the end I undergraded all but Mopsy:

For round 1, I got this: . My score was 5, with one bulls-eye. That looked pretty good to me until I saw how many others got the same grade or less. For round 2, I got . That makes me worry that I did badly or seriously compromised what was a good start. We'll see.

5.0-5.5. I see some higher grades from other posters here, but the paper color and alignment + wrap make this a lower grade for me.

grades sent