Curious to read the consistency, fervor, and angst, over THIS "theft" recently!

[Guest]

Check out this Ebay auction #716121774....and please post your thoughts as to what seems EXACTLY like the text to my CGC 10.0 auction. Hmmmmmmm, quite disturbing plagiarizing another persons auction...that should be quite shameful to most in here...right?

 

Webster's definition: Plagiarize, to STEAL from the writings of another!

 

Just thought some of you might be interested...not that I'M going to make a mountain out of it however...

[Guest]

Yes, ..well, I did have my doubts regarding that consistency!

[Guest]

we were just trying to ignore you.

 

it would also help if you posted links to the auctions in question. Or maybe, if you can handle this extremely technical action, paste the offending plagiarized text right here in the forums along with those links....

 

 

[scottish]

Doesn't look like he hung around very long. Just for the record using someone else's description is the same as using some else's scan. False representation both ways.

 

Just my opinion.

[wolvergeek]

Using someone's text is not the same as stealing someone's picture. Although frowned upon by many, you are not bidding on the text of the auction. The item however, represented by the scan, is what you are bidding on. Much worse to steal pictures than text.

[Guest]

I will attempt to do that...

[Kevin Boyd]

Yes and no.

 

I've had people swipe my text before, couldn't care less. They were just being lazy. It's almost flattering that they liked my wording.

 

However, a picture of the actual item swiped....

 

If we're talking a low price book, who cares? It's still stealing, but I can accept that it is a reasonable facsimile of what one is selling.

 

However, when we are talking about books that will sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars, it is absolutely offensive to use another person's scan and represent it as your own. Especially when the buyer's decision is very much reliant on what they see in that scan!

 

Kev

 

[Guest]

No offense Wolvergeek, but that statement is rather silly actually. WRITTEN text is CREATED by the author, hence why it's actually a CRIME to steal it!

 

USING a scan of a book regardless of who's book it is, isn't a CRIME and hardly compares, that's technically speaking of course. One's personal opinion on the act is another thing completely, which is understood.

 

However, the scan is NEVER really created by the seller, the book exists with or without YOU, and in MANY numbers and similar grades, so although it may be YOUR book by ownership, you did NOT create it.

 

Just food for thought...

[supapimp]

i agree with kev, using my text word for word would be flattering. stealing or using someone else's scan if it's not yours or did not buy the book from the seller with the scan is just plain false advertising and wrong. unless you state in your item description, scan of book is not the actual book.

[cd4ever]

Stealing text from another seller is merely lazy and really doesn't affect anything as long as the text remans truthful to the item you are selling.

 

Stealing a scan is misrepresenting the item for sale to any potential buyers, a little higher on the 'lack of integrity' list.

 

Neither are that bad though really as long as the item description and its contents portray a fair and accurate presentation of the auction.

[Guest]

cd...you are 100% correct with that opinion, that is what I always assumed to be true, how refreshing this was to read...

[Guest]

cd...you are 100% correct with that opinion, that is what I always assumed to be true, how refreshing this was to read...

If you agree with this, why didn't you just fess up when ubiquiti stated you'd swiped the scan of his DD 158? And why the hell did you PM him an offensive reply, suggesting your book is 'probably better than his, anyway.'?

 

How about ending auctions early? Where does that rank in your personal sense of what's right and wrong? I doubt cd concurs with your opinion there.

 

Or stating you have a DD 168 CGC 9.8? Is that shown in the census, yet?

 

Or sending notch top an 'NM' ASM 129 with a crushed corner?

[scottish]

I disagree. If someone doesn't have a scan but describes the book as NM I'm bidding based on that information.

[FlyingDonut]

Well, I swipe text all the time. If somebody is describing something better than me, I have no qualms about swiping it, especially if its something that I don't know anything about. I also have no qualms if people poach my text, what do I care. As long as they are just stealing the description, and not my fees, or links, or anything else, I couldn't care less.

 

Bottom line is that they still have to have the actual product, which is why stealing scans is a whole lot worse. eBay is, for better or for worse, a visual medium, and I buy the book from the scan, NOT the description if I don't know the seller. If somebody has scan "A" and sends me book "B" I think that is at the best ignorance on the seller (for example if somebody is selling an X-Men 98, has no clue there's a variant and has poached an X-Men 98 scan - don't laugh, it happened) and at the worst fraud.

 

Just my two cents.

 

And, as much as it pains me to defend procrustean, he might have a CGC 9.8 Daredevil 168. The CGC Census is NOT complete . I have, in my hot little hands RIGHT now a CGC 8.0 Iron Man 100 35 cent variant that's not on that list.

 

But girls, girls, you need to drop the drama level a bit. Go watch Survivor or something.

[Guest]

And, as much as it pains me to defend procrustean, he might have a CGC 9.8 Daredevil 168. The CGC Census is NOT complete .

Sounds good in theory, Dan.... but he claimed in another thread that stating he had a 9.8 was a typo - he'd meant 9.6.

 

Maybe his finger slipped... TWO KEYS OVER?

[Guest]

I'm in consensus with you on the relative degree of inappropriateness of text swiping vs. scan swiping, though.

 

[Guest]

Doc, geeze, now this is where a line MUST be drawn. Your blind bias is now misguiding you to use NOTCH TOP (AKA SILVERAGEFAN) as an example of good intention? oh man, now go look at yourself in the mirror and ask if that's a wise decision?

[Mister_Comics]

Using someone elses stuff on the internet may not be illegal. Its up to the original owner to protest his stuff. If someone uses something off the internet, it may not be a crime. Ebay and many other sites give you the option to do just that. You see it done here everyday. Folks posting comic cover pictures or links to auctions. I usually try to word my written stuff in a way that makes its unusable for anyone to borrow. Thats one way to protect your internet stuff.

[Joanna]

I don't like the thought of either text or scan theft. They both speak to the honesty of the seller, IMO. If you steal someone else's text, what if a description of the comic is in there and that wasn't changed? That description might be the thing that gets the buyer to go for it. In the case of a CGC book, that isn't as important, but we've seen CGC books sold as one grade when the scan is another. The text says 9.6 and the auction is really for a 9.4. There are a lot of reasons why this can happen (the seller using a template, for example) but it can also be because the seller stole the text and didn't read it carefully.

 

Scan theft, however, seems even worse, as it the image is the only real link the buyer has to the actual book. I hate to even think someone would steal scans in the comic area. That seems really outragreous to me, very fraudulent. Especially if someone said it was the an actual scan of the book as someone mentioned (obviously, a thief should be smart enough not to say that, at least).

 

I think Procrustean is right to be upset at the theft of his text. But if someone stole his scans, that would be far worse from a buyer's POV, as that is pure misrepresentation. The scans are all we have to go by sometimes.

 

-- Joanna

[spidermanbeyond]

" I've had people swipe my text before, couldn't care less. They were just being lazy. It's almost flattering that they liked my wording."

 

Ok, I confess I am the guy who did the swiping. I did not think it is was big deal as I do it to save time. I 'm glad most you don't think it is a problem. It is the "description" that is being swiped (not the book). Same thing when an artist does a swipe of classic comic cover. I agree swiping of scan is a different story.