[G1911]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

I found that quite fascinating. Thanks for posting that.

I've bought myself a Porter T218.

I'm biased, but it's a great looking card, nice pickup

Originally Posted by Michael B

Here are a few photos of Porter from my archives. The captions on both are dated 1909 though one shows him in his Cornell sweatshirt and the other in his 1908 Olympic uniform. He probably graduated from Cornell in 1905 where his best finish was 2nd in the IC4A championships. He won the gold medal in the high jump at the 1908 Olympics in London. He was the #1 ranked high jumper in the world in 1909. One of the captions notes he was a Christian Scientist. Looked at a lot of the cards on ebay and I have original photos of most, if not all, of the Olympic athletes in the set.

This is a photo of the photo after it was marked with highlight/masking paint. His face looks almost comical. The rag tied on the high bar was a common practice and legal back then. You can also see it under his leg on the card.

Feel free to share more of the T218 source images, please. I am hopeful printing timeframes may be made clearer by source photography. I do not know track and field besides my interest in these cards and the athletes that appear in the set and the closely related E229. Some have copious material I've found, there's not much secondary source material on Porter I've found, just a very brief record of his biggest races, and some primary newspaper articles.

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Thanks Greg, interesting footnote on Porter and the ATC...to me it seems like he was suing the big guy for the principle of it. The legal side is not the reason why I (or probably any of us) got into our vintage collecting hobby, but still another bit of knowledge that diligent researchers probably enjoyed digging into, and another piece in the puzzle how these companies operated and produced the things we kinda like.

Thanks again Greg for sharing.

Here is regular issue high jumper and ATC shamer Harry, as well as the Mecca that is his Harry backside.

Brian

Why he was suing, I don't know. The records I've found of this case are clearly incomplete, there had to be court events both before and after this hearing on a procedural matter. I have not been able to find a record of them online or in a couple law libraries. I hope someone may eventually find a more detailed record. The suit itself isn't particularly interesting I think, but it may really help solve some card mysteries and better connect the production process from conception to distribution.

Originally Posted by Pat R

I was going to look into this more after I found this article a few years ago but I still haven't done any further research on it. I believe in New York at least a persons image could have been used without their permission for advertising or trade purposes if it was from a picture that was in the possession of the lithographer or advertising company prior to the 1905 law.

I think we dived into this a couple years ago, and as I recall we found other references and within the court decisions that this was the case, there were many other limitations too rather than a very broad blanket right. The courts seemed to have struggled to define many elements of the law and there's much debate in the NY courts for a number of years. Here's the Roberson case: https://casetext.com/case/roberson-v...lding-box-co-1

Many subjects may not have had to sign papers at all. That Hyland did indicates, I think, that the lithographers probably sought consent from most subjects as while Hyland fought in NY plenty, he was a Californian and did not live in NY.

Originally Posted by toppcat

Some background here on Fullgraff, ALC and Brett Litho: CLICK

What we know at present about Fullgraff, the ALC, and Brett is mostly compiled here: https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=309276. Page 2 and on is mostly the research and what has so far been found, and deductions that result rather than being about the original topic.