ComicLink Spring Auction

[Claudio]

What Are The Statute of Limitations For a Breach of Contract? Google gave me this link, no idea if it's good data or not: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=breach+of+contract+statute+of+limitations&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIkuWY8rXLAhVFQSYKHXAnDGgQgQMIGzAA

 

Assuming accuracy, would the "written" column apply here? If so, I'd imagine the clock resets every time the piece is sold? Which is the contractual state, Barry's or the buyer's (if different) - if it's a web site purchase?

 

So in the "what if the original purchases tore the stupid thing off the back and waited until the SOL ran out" scenario, THEN sold it (on day later, let's say), all TAP liability has disappeared at that time and BWS can go pound sand. No?

 

SOL starts when the item is sold and the payment is witheld from BWS. It does not start when the contract was made.

[comiconxion]

I talked with Douglas a ComicLink. They have been actively working on researching the history of this agreement and have every intent of full-disclosure when the full description is posted. They didn't want that to hold up the preview of the item.

 

So, it sounds like they will make sure that potential buyers know what they are signing up for prior to bidding and will confirm that the paperwork is up to date.

 

 

[Bird]

I talked with Douglas a ComicLink. They have been actively working on researching the history of this agreement and have every intent of full-disclosure when the full description is posted. They didn't want that to hold up the preview of the item.

 

So, it sounds like they will make sure that potential buyers know what they are signing up for prior to bidding and will confirm that the paperwork is up to date.

 

 

So there is definitely a transfer of artists rights on this?

 

I buy from BWS directly on occasion and have never been asked to sign a TAR. I know someone with 46 pieces of BWS art, I might ask him if he has any with TARs attached.

[delekkerste]

So there is definitely a transfer of artists rights on this?

 

I buy from BWS directly on occasion and have never been asked to sign a TAR. I know someone with 46 pieces of BWS art, I might ask him if he has any with TARs attached.

 

I was the under the impression that BWS only asked for TARs on his original creations (i.e., not for his commercial work for Marvel & other publishers). If he's ever asked for a TAR on a published piece of his Marvel art, this is the first I'm hearing of it.

[vodou]

All good, I just wanted to be clear too...I'd never suggest someone imperil themselves legally! Everybody has got to work out their risk:reward tolerance on that end for themselves. And I agree, he tells you upfront that his terms of sale are more onerous than handing him some cash. That's the way it should be, his art his terms, and the free market will reward him or not (my case) as it sees fit. For sure - if he was offering $50k originals for $5k, but TAR encumbered, there would still be no shortage of willing buyers. All. Day. Long.

[comix4fun]

So there is definitely a transfer of artists rights on this?

 

I buy from BWS directly on occasion and have never been asked to sign a TAR. I know someone with 46 pieces of BWS art, I might ask him if he has any with TARs attached.

 

I was the under the impression that BWS only asked for TARs on his original creations (i.e., not for his commercial work for Marvel & other publishers). If he's ever asked for a TAR on a published piece of his Marvel art, this is the first I'm hearing of it.

 

 

 

I thought it was more on the size of the purchase than anything else, but you could be right. I bought my pieces from him before he started with this TAR stuff, but when I inquired about art later it seemed that he picked and chose which ones had the agreement attached.

[vodou]

What Are The Statute of Limitations For a Breach of Contract? Google gave me this link, no idea if it's good data or not: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=breach+of+contract+statute+of+limitations&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIkuWY8rXLAhVFQSYKHXAnDGgQgQMIGzAA

 

Assuming accuracy, would the "written" column apply here? If so, I'd imagine the clock resets every time the piece is sold? Which is the contractual state, Barry's or the buyer's (if different) - if it's a web site purchase?

 

So in the "what if the original purchases tore the stupid thing off the back and waited until the SOL ran out" scenario, THEN sold it (on day later, let's say), all TAP liability has disappeared at that time and BWS can go pound sand. No?

 

SOL starts when the item is sold and the payment is witheld from BWS. It does not start when the contract was made.

Yes correct. Sorry sloppy thinking. But going back to my example: just change it to first (re)seller doesn't make new buyer aware, then new buyer re-sells 20 years later..original (re)seller is liable forever and always, but his buyer that later sold...not?

 

Seems to me like the only thing this does is encourage sellers to offer privately instead of at public auction. These things can trade back and forth behind the scenes, Barry none wiser, and once Barry's original customer passes away...it's essentially a free pass for everyone else that came after. And no warm body for Barry/Estate to go after, either.

[rotembk]

Yes correct. Sorry sloppy thinking. But going back to my example: just change it to first (re)seller doesn't make new buyer aware, then new buyer re-sells 20 years later..original (re)seller is liable forever and always, but his buyer that later sold...not?

 

Seems to me like the only thing this does is encourage sellers to offer privately instead of at public auction. These things can trade back and forth behind the scenes, Barry none wiser, and once Barry's original customer passes away...it's essentially a free pass for everyone else that came after. And no warm body for Barry/Estate to go after, either.

 

Unless the TAP rises to the level of an in rem right (and based on what others wrote it seems it doesn't) and unless the secondary buyer was on notice that their acquisition was subject to a TAP, then the SOL is a red herring; BWS should have no recourse to the secondary buyer or any subsequent buyer for that matter (with the possible exception of the original buyer from BWS if they happen to buy the piece again; maybe if they buy the piece down the road in an auction they'd be in the clear as well, but I haven't thought it through).

[Brian Peck]

I talked with Douglas a ComicLink. They have been actively working on researching the history of this agreement and have every intent of full-disclosure when the full description is posted. They didn't want that to hold up the preview of the item.

 

So, it sounds like they will make sure that potential buyers know what they are signing up for prior to bidding and will confirm that the paperwork is up to date.

 

 

I see this as completely bogus, the agreement isnt legal beyond the resale. I do not see how Clink can post this as part of the auction.

[Shemp]

I see this as completely bogus, the agreement isnt legal beyond the resale. I do not see how Clink can post this as part of the auction.

 

The seller wants to honor the agreement he made with BWS.

[Brian Peck]

But the buyer has no legal obligation to agree to an agreement the seller signed.

[batman_fan]

But the buyer has no legal obligation to agree to an agreement the seller signed.

 

Wouldn't they if the seller made it a condition of the purchase. Sort of like getting stuck with Hef if you buy the playboy mansion

[ThothAmon]

What Are The Statute of Limitations For a Breach of Contract? Google gave me this link, no idea if it's good data or not: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=breach+of+contract+statute+of+limitations&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIkuWY8rXLAhVFQSYKHXAnDGgQgQMIGzAA

 

Assuming accuracy, would the "written" column apply here? If so, I'd imagine the clock resets every time the piece is sold? Which is the contractual state, Barry's or the buyer's (if different) - if it's a web site purchase?

 

So in the "what if the original purchases tore the stupid thing off the back and waited until the SOL ran out" scenario, THEN sold it (on day later, let's say), all TAP liability has disappeared at that time and BWS can go pound sand. No?

 

And before anybody gets worked up, I'm not suggesting fraud here or previous, just possible legal loopholes. All in the abstract. I own no BWS with or w/o TAP

Statute of limitations for most contract disputes would be based upon state law. In Ny for instance, claims must be filed within 6 years for a written contract. If I were bidding, I would be happy if people shied away because of this. Now if Bernie Sanders becomes president ...

[Bill C]

Flash #176 cover:

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fauctions%2Fpreview.asp%3Fcode%3D2016may%26itemtype%3D1%26Artist%3DCARMINE%2520INFANTINO%23Item_1113182&id=1113182

 

They may update the description (as they say they'll provide a better image) but I do have a few reservations about the description- starting with the restoration that was done (looks great, but should be disclosed).

[vodou]

Flash #176 cover:

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fauctions%2Fpreview.asp%3Fcode%3D2016may%26itemtype%3D1%26Artist%3DCARMINE%2520INFANTINO%23Item_1113182&id=1113182

 

They may update the description (as they say they'll provide a better image) but I do have a few reservations about the description- starting with the restoration that was done (looks great, but should be disclosed).

So for this to be up for sale, somebody has to love money a fair bit more than this piece.

That I do not get.

Money is lame.

This cover is bee-yoooo-tiful

[Bronty]

Different strokes. I like it a lot but much prefer some of the other Flash covers that have sold recently

[Bill C]

I believe it's 11" x 17", on vellum. I first saw it pop up on CAF, then Burkey got it. Burkey sold it around August 2013, it was going for maybe 8K unrestored on his site, then while in his hands (I think it was said that it was a consignment) it got resto and sold (likely upwards of 8K).

 

I always assumed growing up this was Infantino/Anderson. I've seen conflicting reports on who did what on the covers to 175 and 176. Looks like Anderson did the inks, that much to me is a safe bet. Also a pretty safe bet Infantino did the cover layout/prelim.

 

Never had a piece on vellum. Was that something common for pencilers to use at times? Or would an inker lightbox onto vellum generally? I have no idea on that process.

[vodou]

Different strokes. I like it a lot but much prefer some of the other Flash covers that have sold recently

Hear that. But I'm just comparing it against a stack of filthy lucre. I'll take the cover. And wouldn't let it go. But I definitely won't pay what is required to be top bidder

[delekkerste]

Before and after on that Cap #171 cover:

 

[jaybuck43]

Gene, was it reinked?