Grader Notes

[LWM-migration]

I think your missing the point. All I was saying was that if you pay for a service and if you are not happy with the result and want to know how they arrived at these results, you should not have to pay an additional charge. And Please, If I pay $90 to get a book graded and I think that the grade is not right, considering the price i just paid for the service, do the right thing by the CUSTOMER and not try to milk them for every last penny. How's That!!!!

 

And I did submit six books at the $95 tier. I think I should be given the notes free of charge for my $570.

[hockey&comicsguy]

Nowhere is it stated how CGC arrive at the grade...which is what the submitter has bought...and neither is it incumbent upon them to reach that grade by a laid-down and agreed method, other than two people and a finaliser will view the book and render an opinion.

 

That opinion could be kept in their heads, spelled out in used cigarette butts in the parking lot, or communicated to the labelling department by means of secret hand signals.

 

100% correct.

 

I'll pose the question again, does anyone think they could force CGC to provide notes (since the notes "belong" to the submitter) and the argument is that they are a part of what you paid for? The answer is no.

 

You'd never be able to legally force them to provide notes, ie dictate their operating procedures. You cannot force CGC to take notes. If the argument is that notes are a part of what you paid for, you'd be able to do that b/c CGC didn't fulfill their end of the contract by providing you the notes that belong to you as a part of the service you bought. But you can't.

 

And if you can't force CGC to provide notes then I think it's clear you have no claim nor ownership to those notes and therefore cannot dictate what CGC does with them, be it sell them or wipe their arses with them.

 

 

 

[FlyingDonut]

[hockey&comicsguy]

I think your missing the point. All I was saying was that if you pay for a service and if you are not happy with the result and want to know how they arrived at these results, you should not have to pay an additional charge.

 

You have no right to those notes. CGC does not have to answer the phone and read you the notes nor do they have to provide them to you in writing. You have no legal right to know how they came to their results. "should not have to pay" is a personal feeling that has no legal bearing at all.

 

And Please, If I pay $90 to get a book graded and I think that the grade is not right, considering the price i just paid for the service, do the right thing by the CUSTOMER and not try to milk them for every last penny. How's That!!!!

 

So don't slab books. And don't pay the additional cost for notes. Nobody is sticking a gun to your head to force you to slab or pay additional monies for notes. You either choose to pay for an additional service or you don't.

[MrBedrock]

They are not theirs.

Nowhere is it stated how CGC arrive at the grade...which is what the submitter has bought...and neither is it incumbent upon them to reach that grade by a laid-down and agreed method, other than two people and a finaliser will view the book and render an opinion.

 

That opinion could be kept in their heads, spelled out in used cigarette butts in the parking lot, or communicated to the labelling department by means of secret hand signals.

Whether or not the notes are CGC's or a byproduct of work for hire is the crux of the problem. You say they belong to The CGC to do with what they wish.. I say they don't. There is legal precedent for both side's arguments.

[MrBedrock]

Nowhere is it stated how CGC arrive at the grade...which is what the submitter has bought...and neither is it incumbent upon them to reach that grade by a laid-down and agreed method, other than two people and a finaliser will view the book and render an opinion.

 

That opinion could be kept in their heads, spelled out in used cigarette butts in the parking lot, or communicated to the labelling department by means of secret hand signals.

 

100% correct.

 

I'll pose the question again, does anyone think they could force CGC to provide notes (since the notes "belong" to the submitter) and the argument is that they are a part of what you paid for? The answer is no.

 

You'd never be able to legally force them to provide notes, ie dictate their operating procedures. You cannot force CGC to take notes. If the argument is that notes are a part of what you paid for, you'd be able to do that b/c CGC didn't fulfill their end of the contract by providing you the notes that belong to you as a part of the service you bought. But you can't.

 

And if you can't force CGC to provide notes then I think it's clear you have no claim nor ownership to those notes and therefore cannot dictate what CGC does with them, be it sell them or wipe their arses with them.

 

 

There could be a legal determination that the notes are a byproduct of a work for hire contract, in which case the submitter would have the final say in what becomes of them.

[hockey&comicsguy]

Whether or not the notes are CGC's or a byproduct of work for hire is the crux of the problem. You say they belong to The CGC to do with what they wish.. I say they don't. There is legal precedent for both side's arguments.

 

Richard, my personal feeling is that the original submitter should be provided the notes. IMO it makes sense and the notes provide important details about the finished product and makes it appear as though you paid for a true inspection. Notes, IMO are the difference between what you pay for with CGC vs John Doe's opinion of a comic's grade.

 

That said, (and perhaps its a bit early to dive into this) shouldn't somebody file suit against CGC for their notes? If the notes truly belong to the submitter, legal action should be taken to procure the notes for every book ever submitted that you didn't get notes on. Otherwise CGC has not fulfilled their end of the contract by giving you everything you paid for.

 

Do I think the claimant would win that argument? No.

[hockey&comicsguy]

There could be a legal determination that the notes are a byproduct of a work for hire contract, in which case the submitter would have the final say in what becomes of them.

 

See my last post. (thumbs u

 

You have a valid point and that's why I think somebody should file suit. Otherwise we're all just wishing in one hand hoping CGC will reverse course out of a sense of altruism or something.

 

IMO, to get what you're suggesting (which is plausible for sure), legal action will need to be taken.

 

Which is unfortunate to say the least.

[LWM-migration]

That is one great point. My comic that I paid for and the grading that i paid for establish these so called notes. If I list the look on ebay can someone put in that serial number and buy "MY" notes from CGC. I am sure this is done as if I sell the book, that person can most likely get the notes as the new owner.

[hockey&comicsguy]

That is one great point. My comic that I paid for and the grading that i paid for establish these so called notes. If I list the look on ebay can someone put in that serial number and buy "MY" notes from CGC. I am sure this is done as if I sell the book, that person can most likely get the notes as the new owner.

 

 

As of right now, yes they can. Until (and if) legal action states otherwise.

 

Legal action is going to be the only way to determine ownership short of CGC simply changing their minds. I'm not counting on that.

 

And even then, the verdict may not go in the submitter's favor. FWIW I think any suit over the notes is destined to fail. But i'm not a lawyer so WTF do I know. Just my

[Crows]

I sure hope that all businesses dont follow suit.

[fantastic_four]

A few years back, Steve Borock confirmed that one of the problems with grader's notes being made available on-line was that they weren't actually in a database and that the first step would be to go back to start to input everything they had graded up to that point.

 

When did he do that? I've called for notes several times--first time was around 2003, last time around 2009--and more than once I've gotten the impression they were bringing them up in an internal computer system. At least once I could hear typing going on as I read the certification number, once they said it was coming up slowly, and another time he started reading off the wrong book, presumably because he typed the number in wrong.

 

What I've always heard is that their notes are in shorthand or are such a mess that the guy reading them to you sort of edited them on the fly as he read them aloud so they'd make sense and hide anything that was probably clearly wrong or fishy in the notes.

[Transplant]

There could be a legal determination that the notes are a byproduct of a work for hire contract, in which case the submitter would have the final say in what becomes of them.

 

See my last post. (thumbs u

 

You have a valid point and that's why I think somebody should file suit. Otherwise we're all just wishing in one hand hoping CGC will reverse course out of a sense of altruism or something.

 

IMO, to get what you're suggesting (which is plausible for sure), legal action will need to be taken.

 

Which is unfortunate to say the least.

I'm getting so tired of this discussion. But I want to make another point. There isn't just the question of if a submitter can force CGC to divulge the notes. Maybe they can and maybe they can't. There's another question of whether CGC can sell the non-public description of something that was entrusted to them to perform the grading service. That's the crux.

 

You may not be entitled to get them, for free or for a cost. But, CGC is just as likely not entitled to sell that information to others.

[fantastic_four]

You may not be entitled to get them, for free or for a cost. But, CGC is just as likely not entitled to sell that information to others.

 

That's possible--it'd likely be a part of property law, and I wouldn't be surprised if it varies by state. However, I doubt it--seems like car sales services like CarFax should have this all figured out and wouldn't be able to exist if what you're suggesting is the case. They somehow collect information about people's cars and sell it. I've never looked into that service, but I've always been curious about how they get their data on cars and what sorts of legal issues they face.

[Flaming_Telepath]

A few years back, Steve Borock confirmed that one of the problems with grader's notes being made available on-line was that they weren't actually in a database and that the first step would be to go back to start to input everything they had graded up to that point.

 

When did he do that? I've called for notes several times--first time was around 2003, last time around 2009--and more than once I've gotten the impression they were bringing them up in an internal computer system. At least once I could hear typing going on as I read the certification number, once they said it was coming up slowly, and another time he started reading off the wrong book, presumably because he typed the number in wrong.

 

What I've always heard is that their notes are in shorthand or are such a mess that the guy reading them to you sort of edited them on the fly so they'd make sense and hide anything that was probably clearly wrong or fishy in the notes.

 

This is the most likely scenario...the database/excel sheet/word document wasn't/isn't readable to anyone other than a grader.

 

But it looks like they are now going to make them readable by reentering them in a different format and the man-hours required to do this will be covered by the fees. (thumbs u

[hockey&comicsguy]

I sure hope that all businesses dont follow suit.

 

I mentioned this earlier in the thread but perhaps it's not a perfect analogy. I make steel castings. A buyer gives me a blueprint and we engineer it, build the pattern for the mold (which the customer owns as they paid for it) and sell them the end product. At no point whatsoever do they own any of the reason or method (the engineering) used to get the end product. Our engineering is proprietary. It's our "expertise"/method/reasoning, etc... that was used to get the end product. I would liken it to grader's notes, proprietary information that belongs to CGC, not the submitter. I don't like it but that's my contention.

 

 

[hockey&comicsguy]

 

You may not be entitled to get them, for free or for a cost. But, CGC is just as likely not entitled to sell that information to others.

 

 

Why? I don't have to provide my engineering to the original buyer but if a friend from another foundry is making a similar part and is having difficulties with it I am certainly able to share with him how we did it. Now I can't divulge some of the particulars related to my customer, such as I made widget x for customer y, here's a copy of their blueprint for you to copy or here's one of their parts for you to reverse engineer. But I sure as hell can tell them exactly where I placed the extra feed metal or the fed paths or the riser or gate placement, etc, etc.......

 

I would think if you have no right to obtain the notes, then you have no right to any say with regards to the notes. Again, not a legal scholar here just expressing my thoughts.

 

 

 

ps: Would what you're hinting at be anything like an attorney/client or doctor/patient confidentiality issue? The notes are attached to my book and the particulars of my property should not be divulged to other parties. I could maybe see some merit in that argument.

[Transplant]

Part of what I'm tired of discussing is bad analogies. Nobody said you have to disclose the engineering behind whatever manufacturing you did for someone.

 

But imagine if you were given a machine by a company and asked to make a replacement part for it. Are you now entitled to sell to that company's competitors a complete description of the inner workings and structure of that machine?

[Peter Loves Gwen]

A few years back, Steve Borock confirmed that one of the problems with grader's notes being made available on-line was that they weren't actually in a database and that the first step would be to go back to start to input everything they had graded up to that point.

 

When did he do that? I've called for notes several times--first time was around 2003, last time around 2009--and more than once I've gotten the impression they were bringing them up in an internal computer system. At least once I could hear typing going on as I read the certification number, once they said it was coming up slowly, and another time he started reading off the wrong book, presumably because he typed the number in wrong.

 

What I've always heard is that their notes are in shorthand or are such a mess that the guy reading them to you sort of edited them on the fly so they'd make sense and hide anything that was probably clearly wrong or fishy in the notes.

 

This is the most likely scenario...the database/excel sheet/word document wasn't/isn't readable to anyone other than a grader.

 

But it looks like they are now going to make them readable by reentering them in a different format and the man-hours required to do this will be covered by the fees. (thumbs u

 

Good thought Nick, that supposition would better explain the high fees than anything else. If they truly still have the notes stored in some complicated form which requires graders to spend time deciphering them, then there will be a lot of labor involved to transform the database.

 

If that's what's happening, then the graders will be busier than ever, and grading times will get even slower. But it would explain the need for another fee to cover the loss of labor from graders, for a period of time. If that was happening and I was running things, the recent new grading fees would include those new labor costs.

[hockey&comicsguy]

Part of what I'm tired of discussing is bad analogies. Nobody said you have to disclose the engineering behind whatever manufacturing you did for someone.

 

But imagine if you were given a machine by a company and asked to make a replacement part for it. Are you now entitled to sell to that company's competitors a complete description of the inner workings and structure of that machine?

 

 

The engineering or the grader's notes are both the thought process/determinations used to obtain the end result. I don't see a problem with that analogy.

 

Your analogy about the machine isn't applicable to me. I'm never given the machine, just the specific part needing replaced. And depending upon the contracted services, I may indeed be able to give away or sell any information about that specific part if I own that information.