So who is picking on MarketKing

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Found this on another message board, thought some of you might like to read this.

http://www.geocities.com/~marketking/index.html

[Archive]

Posted By: DD

"Portraits are no longer available at my studio, as I am working on other projects. " - From his web site

My translation - I suck at photography, and make more money scamming people. It's a great marketing, I mean Market King technique.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Unbelievable. He really needs to get a grip on reality. He could do what he does if he didn't try to scam people into thinking his stuff is real and authentic. He commits fraud and then trys to defend it saying it's his constitutional right to do it. Another idiot....

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Boy, a Harvard guy like Robert Lukehart sure knows his constitutional law. Amazing that with all of his Harvard connections he's unable to find a lawfirm willing to represent him.

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

is it a constitutional right to scam people on ebay?

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Babcock

1. Why do people in the internet age have the compulsion to put every aspect of their lives on the net even when it makes them look bad?

2. In my experience, people who have no case threaten to sue. People who do have a case sue.

Great entertainment for us, though.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

If what he's making is called "Art" then why isn't he listing the items in the "Art" category on ebay?

[Archive]

Posted By: J.McMurry

"This level of art is not distinquished by "authentic" or "not authentic." This art is distinquished for what it is. "


"Depends on what your definition of is, is"


This guy would make a top notch politician.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycle

All he had to do was list them as modern or as having been made by him, so buyers know what they are purchasing. If they are works of art, why didn't he take credit for them in the auctions? I know of no artist who doesn't take credit for his art.

And, as noted, if its art photography, why is it being listed in the tobacco card category? eBay has categories for art photography for self representing artists. Isn't it on its face deceptive to list photos of old cards in the tobacco card category and not mention they were made in 2008 by the seller? Isn't it on its face deceptive to write 'Joe DiMaggio' on a baseball, list it in the eBay autographs category and not mention that the 'Joe DiMaggio' was written yesterday by the seller? Whether or not the seller considers it art, whether or not it is art, is beside the point.

"This level of art is not distinquished by "authentic" or "not authentic."

A counterfeit $100 bill can be considered art, but it will also be considered a counterfeit. It's not an either/or proposition. Something can simultaneously be art and be illegal. All the Treasury Department Agent will care about is that it's a counterfeit. To the agent, the art may not be defined by if the bill is 'authentic' or 'not authentic,' but the legality of the bill, and whether or not someone could be going to prison, most certainly is defined by whether or not the bill is "authentic" or "not authentic."

The "art" argument for not having to say something is a modern reprint on eBay is silly. If this was a valid legal argument, all currency counterfeiters would call themselves artists and, for all practical purposes, currency counterfeiting would be legal.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony S.

So much rigmarole to wade through, but this may be my favorite excerpt from the MarketKing Manifesto:

"It is responsibility of the buyer or the collecting industry to adjust to our Constitution. It is not the responsibility of the artist or dealer to do so."

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Some poor student somewhere got a rejection letter from Harvard because they let this idiot in.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

What's this guy doing? Is he making fake cards and calling them art and selling them to unwitting customers who think they are buying an authentic card?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

He is doing exactly as you guessed - trying to pass them off as real and when caught he thinks he can hide behind the constitution. Dumbest Harvard grad ever.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Dan, I'd be stunned if this guy has a degree from Harvard; UNC maybe, but definitely not Harvard.*

* Have not seen Brian W around here in a long while and suspect this edited addition may get him to say hello.

[Archive]

Posted By: CS Bolay

So does this mean $10 Durer and van Gogh prints from my local Hobby Lobby are just as 'authentic' as the original? Hot diggity, I'm an art dealer now!

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

I honestly wouldn't have a problem with what he's doing as long as he's marking them as reprints and being upfront about it. I don't know if copyright laws allow it or not.

I have seen people selling ceramic copies of classic cards and they looked like good pieces of art. Obviously they weren't trying to fool anyone into thinking they were getting an authentic 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. It really causes me a lot of pain to see how much fraud there is in my hobby that I love.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycle

"I honestly wouldn't have a problem with what he's doing as long as he's marking them as reprints and being upfront about it. I don't know if copyright laws allow it or not."

I agree with you Matt. However, he didn't mark them or label them as reprints, and never mentioned in the auctions that they were recently made.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I have asked all of his ebay user ID's if the photos were period prints or if they were recently made and every time he says he doesn't know.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenneth A. Cohen

Why won't PRO Legal Associates take his case?

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt E.

He was wearing my Harvard tie.



Can you believe it? My Harvard tie.
Like, oh sure, he went to Harvard.

Louis Winthorpe III

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Babcock

Why would any artist use such a difficult to read white font?

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycle

My sister is a professional sculptor and executive at an art institute, and most professional artists are knowledgeable about copyrights, etc, especially as it pertains to protecting their own work and avoiding infringing upon the rights of others. She even took a course on the subject. As I said earlier, about all artists of original work place their moniker on the work and say its by them-- so they get credit and so someone else can't steal credit. Even when they have BFAs and not law degrees, professional artists know its unethical and illegal to photograph a fellow artist's work and sell the photos on eBay. They know that being artists doesn't absolve them of legal responsibilities. They know that the laws they must follow are the laws that protect their own work. They know that counterfeiting is against the law.

So if the 'artist not having to identify that something is a modern reprint on eBay' legal theory is gibberish to a lawyer, it's also gibberish to most artists.