Washington Post article on the altered card scandal

[cubsguy1969]

The bigger question is why didn't the Washington Post run before and after photos of a doctored card. I can't imagine they wouldn't have permission from the BODA people to do so.

Because whoever took those photos owns the rights to those photos and would have to get paid for their use, or grant permission for their use. And I imagine they aren't too eager to do that.

I work at a big newspaper and the rules for photo usage have gotten insane. Even star publicity photos, which ostensibly were taken for PUBLICITY, require permission for use. Otherwise the photographer wants paid.

I agree using the SGC photo is bad. That's just lazy. Someone not paying attention.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by cubsguy1969

The bigger question is why didn't the Washington Post run before and after photos of a doctored card. I can't imagine they wouldn't have permission from the BODA people to do so.

Because whoever took those photos owns the rights to those photos and would have to get paid for their use, or grant permission for their use. And I imagine they aren't too eager to do that.

I work at a big newspaper and the rules for photo usage have gotten insane. Even star publicity photos, which ostensibly were taken for PUBLICITY, require permission for use. Otherwise the photographer wants paid.

I agree using the SGC photo is bad. That's just lazy. Someone not paying attention.

Since the items are newsworthy, wouldn't use of the photos fall under fair use?

[Jim65]

These guys will start turning on each other. Getting interviewed by the FBI and the prospect of jail time tends to do that.

[cubsguy1969]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Since the items are newsworthy, wouldn't use of the photos fall under fair use?

I'm pretty sure not. If that were the case, a newspaper photographer could go out, take a photo of a huge news event, post it on the newspaper's site and then anyone could grab it because the event was "newsworthy." Whoever took the photo owns the rights to it. Or the person who paid that person owns the rights. You could run it in your newspaper if you want, but that person could send you a hefty bill for using it. This stuff happens all the time now online. People grab photos from sites and use them for their own purposes. Photographers are coming after these people hard. Pay me! As they should. It's their work. You can't just take it.

[jimjim]

When my Dad calls me to ask me about the baseball card scandal, you know it has hit the main stream. He knows nothing about the industry or hobby. He read about it in a local newspaper.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Good article and I'm glad the issue is becoming a widespread news story - although it's actually an old, ongoing problem with new evidence.

One part of the article that was newsworthy to me was the following statement:

The scandal started after a pair of online collectors began identifying and documenting cards that were allegedly improperly modified. They’ve identified 316 such cards, retouched by nearly a dozen “card doctors,” which sold for a combined $1.4 million.

I'm curious who these alleged dozen doctors are? Only one was alleged in the article by name. (Although I'm very sure there's far more than a dozen involved).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Good article and I'm glad the issue is becoming a widespread news story - although it's actually an old, ongoing problem with new evidence.

One part of the article that was newsworthy to me was the following statement:

The scandal started after a pair of online collectors began identifying and documenting cards that were allegedly improperly modified. They’ve identified 316 such cards, retouched by nearly a dozen “card doctors,” which sold for a combined $1.4 million.

I'm curious who these alleged dozen doctors are? Only one was alleged in the article by name. (Although I'm very sure there's far more than a dozen involved).

I told Jacob there were many and that Gary was far from the only one. I didn't give a number and I didn't use names. Now he MAY be getting it from adding up all the modern trimmers accused on BO? There are certainly quite a few that I have seen.

[swarmee]

http://www.sportscardradio.com/
There's a whole slew of them that blowout guys have discovered in the past year. And if the FBI casts a wider net to include the PSA submission records of auctionhouses, it might uncover quite a few more. I'd like to see them subpeona the records of Dick Towle.

And the IRS should definitely be taking a harder look at these guys.

[cincyredlegs]

I wonder how many people defending pwcc or what is going on is actually alts of the criminals. We already know Bobby has one or two alts where he defends vcp. There is no logical reason how you could defend it.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by cincyredlegs

I wonder how many people defending pwcc or what is going on is actually alts of the criminals. We already know Bobby has one or two alts where he defends vcp. There is no logical reason how you could defend it.

If someone publicly posts that he still buys his cards from PWCC, I hope it doesn't surprise him when he turns to sell that others don't buy from him.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by swarmee

http://www.sportscardradio.com/
There's a whole slew of them that blowout guys have discovered in the past year. And if the FBI casts a wider net to include the PSA submission records of auctionhouses, it might uncover quite a few more. I'd like to see them subpeona the records of Dick Towle.

And the IRS should definitely be taking a harder look at these guys.

Interesting link. Some of the aliases made me chuckle. Thanks for laughs and I can assure you there are more than what was revealed on that website.