My experience with Mike Dringenberg

[comix4fun]

What a supertwat.

 

 

 

 

That's A LOT of monetary value damage done in this picture.

 

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious. Just a tragic waste. Tragic and unnecessary.

[seanfingh]

i guess we all need to put in the window tape " please do not write " for ebay" like Mike Dringenberg does Someone should do that at a con with the artist right next to him

 

I told the dogpack that I am putting "please don't f**k me! Personalize if you want to - my name is Sean." on the tape of all my book from now on.

[Ryan.]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

[comix4fun]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

 

 

That's not really what happened here. People asked him for a signature. They didn't say "do whatever you want with these".

 

If you ask someone to sign something, their name, nothing else..and they draw a derogatory image, phrase, or something that diminishes the value of the item (in this case intentionally) they've defaced an item that was put into their possession for a specific purpose and gone beyond the limit of what was requested from them.

 

A good example is you ask someone to paint your car red, and they proceed to paint your car red and then add a painting of giant dong and berries on the hood, you've entrusted them to paint the vehicle red and passed possession on to them to do so (a bailment), while it is in their hands they have the responsibility to protect that item and return it to the owner or their agent in the same condition as originally tendered but for the requested addition.

 

Where I am located it's defined this way:

 

"Criminal defacement of property.

(a) A person commits criminal defacement of property when the person knowingly damages the property of another by defacing, deforming, or otherwise damaging the property by the use of paint or any other similar substance, or by the use of a writing instrument, etching tool, or any other similar device."

 

The only defense is that the owner WANTED you to deface the item. Given that no one asked for or wanted "for Ebay" placed on their Mint $500 comic, he's got a problem.

[bababooey]

They don't come in red but I've got a white one.

 

 

[comix4fun]

They don't come in red but I've got a white one.

 

 

 

 

We bow down to your google-image-fu.

[bababooey]

yeah my wife's been using my laptop and the auto-complete on that image search was waaaaay too quick!

 

 

 

 

[comicsnyc22]

Someone should tattoo "For Ebay" on Mike's forehead. What an absoluteTool.

[Ryan.]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

 

 

That's not really what happened here. People asked him for a signature. They didn't say "do whatever you want with these".

 

If you ask someone to sign something, their name, nothing else..and they draw a derogatory image, phrase, or something that diminishes the value of the item (in this case intentionally) they've defaced an item that was put into their possession for a specific purpose and gone beyond the limit of what was requested from them.

 

A good example is you ask someone to paint your car red, and they proceed to paint your car red and then add a painting of giant dong and berries on the hood, you've entrusted them to paint the vehicle red and passed possession on to them to do so (a bailment), while it is in their hands they have the responsibility to protect that item and return it to the owner or their agent in the same condition as originally tendered but for the requested addition.

 

Where I am located it's defined this way:

 

"Criminal defacement of property.

(a) A person commits criminal defacement of property when the person knowingly damages the property of another by defacing, deforming, or otherwise damaging the property by the use of paint or any other similar substance, or by the use of a writing instrument, etching tool, or any other similar device."

 

The only defense is that the owner WANTED you to deface the item. Given that no one asked for or wanted "for Ebay" placed on their Mint $500 comic, he's got a problem.

 

Makes sense. The Bergmeister should sell a bunch of "For eBay"s on eBay and pay back all the harmed sadfans.

[comix4fun]

And I'm not saying it's a dead bang winner, but if someone did this to books I owned, that were of significant value when he was trusted to simply sign them, I would make sure his feet were held to the fire regardless of chances of ultimate success.

 

If it were a book or group of books like Sandman #1, I'd more than likely make out a police report detailing the damage and seriously consider civil action. It's great to hold his feet to the fire on Facebook and on message boards but it seems his actions were widespread enough that the damage total actually adds up and seems to demand an accounting, a real accounting. The balance sheet for these collectors is deep in the red.

[Ryan.]

deep in the red.

 

I call that Saturday night at Fingh's.

[DrWatson]

deep in the red.

I call that Saturday night at Fingh's.

I thought it was all pink on the inside.

 

[comix4fun]

deep in the red.

I call that Saturday night at Fingh's.

I thought it was all pink on the inside.

 

 

 

All shades of the same debauchery.

[DrWatson]

That avatar makes me think you're a proponent of special education.

[5ive]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

 

 

That's not really what happened here. People asked him for a signature. They didn't say "do whatever you want with these".

 

If you ask someone to sign something, their name, nothing else..and they draw a derogatory image, phrase, or something that diminishes the value of the item (in this case intentionally) they've defaced an item that was put into their possession for a specific purpose and gone beyond the limit of what was requested from them.

 

A good example is you ask someone to paint your car red, and they proceed to paint your car red and then add a painting of giant dong and berries on the hood, you've entrusted them to paint the vehicle red and passed possession on to them to do so (a bailment), while it is in their hands they have the responsibility to protect that item and return it to the owner or their agent in the same condition as originally tendered but for the requested addition.

 

Where I am located it's defined this way:

 

"Criminal defacement of property.

(a) A person commits criminal defacement of property when the person knowingly damages the property of another by defacing, deforming, or otherwise damaging the property by the use of paint or any other similar substance, or by the use of a writing instrument, etching tool, or any other similar device."

 

The only defense is that the owner WANTED you to deface the item. Given that no one asked for or wanted "for Ebay" placed on their Mint $500 comic, he's got a problem.

 

You pay to get your car painted, he didn't get paid to scribble on the book. Half the time no one even speaks to the person, they just shove a book in their face

[Menace]

And I'm not saying it's a dead bang winner, but if someone did this to books I owned, that were of significant value when he was trusted to simply sign them, I would make sure his feet were held to the fire regardless of chances of ultimate success.

 

If it were a book or group of books like Sandman #1, I'd more than likely make out a police report detailing the damage and seriously consider civil action. It's great to hold his feet to the fire on Facebook and on message boards but it seems his actions were widespread enough that the damage total actually adds up and seems to demand an accounting, a real accounting. The balance sheet for these collectors is deep in the red.

 

Hi Jiri! I am very lucky to have such an understanding customer and a kind new friend.

 

I considered filing a police report just to have a record of the incident, however my reputation amongst creators is important to me. I think this incident is isolated enough that I was most worried about how my own reaction would be perceived as a whole. I do not want creators thinking they should worry about signing for us SS guys because that is not what we are about. Anyhow... I don't want to speak on the issue anymore, I feel bad for everyone involved and the efforts to fix the books are under way so that is the best we can do.

[BeerThirty]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

 

 

That's not really what happened here. People asked him for a signature. They didn't say "do whatever you want with these".

 

If you ask someone to sign something, their name, nothing else..and they draw a derogatory image, phrase, or something that diminishes the value of the item (in this case intentionally) they've defaced an item that was put into their possession for a specific purpose and gone beyond the limit of what was requested from them.

 

A good example is you ask someone to paint your car red, and they proceed to paint your car red and then add a painting of giant dong and berries on the hood, you've entrusted them to paint the vehicle red and passed possession on to them to do so (a bailment), while it is in their hands they have the responsibility to protect that item and return it to the owner or their agent in the same condition as originally tendered but for the requested addition.

 

Where I am located it's defined this way:

 

"Criminal defacement of property.

(a) A person commits criminal defacement of property when the person knowingly damages the property of another by defacing, deforming, or otherwise damaging the property by the use of paint or any other similar substance, or by the use of a writing instrument, etching tool, or any other similar device."

 

The only defense is that the owner WANTED you to deface the item. Given that no one asked for or wanted "for Ebay" placed on their Mint $500 comic, he's got a problem.

 

You pay to get your car painted, he didn't get paid to scribble on the book. Half the time no one even speaks to the person, they just shove a book in their face

 

1) If my brother says he's happy to paint my car for free and chooses to deface my car, it's still defacement, regardless of whether or not he is paid.

 

2) Really? I haven't witnessed a ton (I've been a witness on three occasions), but when I have witnessed, pretty much everyone that I've seen approach a creator has the common courtesy to say "would you mind signing my book" and, most of the time, at least asks them how the con is going for them (that's my default when I read nothing that the creator has done). Most people thank the creator for taking their time to sign the book. I don't really find your generalization that "Half the time no one even speaks to the person, they just shove a book in their face," to be accurate based on my experience.

[5ive]

So what was the convo between creator and the guy getting his booked signed. That's the piece that's missing. Cause it didn't happen to the people before him.

[comix4fun]

I'm fighting it, but the words "criminal defacement" keep creeping across my brain.

 

In most jurisdictions the dollars we are talking about here are felonious.

 

If you hand someone something to sign, and do so with virtually no parameters, or at least with limited instruction, do you willingly forfeit any claims afterward that the person signing can be said to have defaced your property? In other words, you hand someone a comic and say, "Please scribble something on this" and then that person does that very thing, is that actual defacement? I'm not defending Dringy in anyway (natch); I'm just asking because I have no idea what the law would say about this whole ordeal.

 

 

That's not really what happened here. People asked him for a signature. They didn't say "do whatever you want with these".

 

If you ask someone to sign something, their name, nothing else..and they draw a derogatory image, phrase, or something that diminishes the value of the item (in this case intentionally) they've defaced an item that was put into their possession for a specific purpose and gone beyond the limit of what was requested from them.

 

A good example is you ask someone to paint your car red, and they proceed to paint your car red and then add a painting of giant dong and berries on the hood, you've entrusted them to paint the vehicle red and passed possession on to them to do so (a bailment), while it is in their hands they have the responsibility to protect that item and return it to the owner or their agent in the same condition as originally tendered but for the requested addition.

 

Where I am located it's defined this way:

 

"Criminal defacement of property.

(a) A person commits criminal defacement of property when the person knowingly damages the property of another by defacing, deforming, or otherwise damaging the property by the use of paint or any other similar substance, or by the use of a writing instrument, etching tool, or any other similar device."

 

The only defense is that the owner WANTED you to deface the item. Given that no one asked for or wanted "for Ebay" placed on their Mint $500 comic, he's got a problem.

 

You pay to get your car painted, he didn't get paid to scribble on the book. Half the time no one even speaks to the person, they just shove a book in their face

 

It's not the payment for the service, it's the request for the service and the taking someone's property into your possession and the responsibility that you take on, as that person to not intentionally damage that property.

 

And THIS time, people asked for his signature. Knowing the people that had Fingh's book, they asked nicely.

[5ive]

Ok so the owner of the property was not present. Did the person acting on his behalf give his name to be put on the book?