Travis, I was using common sense, but I realize that law isn't all common sense - maybe one of the board lawyers will chime in here. My thinking was that if the buyer ended up in court with the card, that if SGC or PSA stated that it was not authentic, their opinion could be used as expert testimony that would trump the Canadian slab that it is currently in. That was the 'restitution' I was referring to, but maybe I used the wrong term, or maybe I'm wrong. If I'm wrong, that would explain why Cobb and Edwards keep going with this - I thought it was just pure stupidity or that they were enjoying the attention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by travrosty
the cobb edwards card aside, a judge is not going to order restitution because something didnt pass psa or sgc. we had that tested on the autograph side and the dealer who sold the autograph won when the autograph did not pass PSA and the buyer sued because of it.
PSA, SGC, JSA, Beckett are not gods whose decision is automatically final in a court of law. The judge might order restitution if it could be proven to be a reprint, no matter who has the proof, but not because it's PSA or SGC rejected. Proving a reprint is a much higher standard than declaring a reprint.
|
Originally Posted by Runscott
All pure bullshit.
Their model is unworkable if the goal is to sell the card and for it to stay sold. Anyone foolish enough to buy it would immediately turn around and submit it to PSA or SGC, at which time it would be declared a reprint, a lawsuit would ensue and the judge would order restitution...at the very least. For now they can enjoy their ill-gotten moment in the sun (thanks to people like MOK), but they can't sell the card.