BABE RUTH Replica ball ????? Say What ???

[David Atkatz]

It would certainly fool some collectors--perhaps many collectors. In my opinion, though, any dealer fooled by that ball should rethink his occupation.

[JimStinson]

Truth is mighty and will prevail. There is nothing wrong with this, except that it ain't so.
Mark Twain

[mighty bombjack]

The description and price on this one are of note

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI...E:B:SS:US:1123

Edit-link isn't working as this ball was removed, but the same link in my eBay saved searches still brings me to the page. How can I do a screen grab?

[Tuna82]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

The description and price on this one are of note

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI...E:B:SS:US:1123

Edit-link isn't working as this ball was removed, but the same link in my eBay saved searches still brings me to the page. How can I do a screen grab?

Ctrl + Print Screen (usually top right by "page break" button), then paste it into a something like Paint where you can save it as a image file to upload

[mravk]

I also see Jeter and Ichiro "replicate". I hope he has obtained licenses from the players for the rights to reproduce them. Maybe we should drop a note to MLB licensing.

[Wymers Auction]

Has this replica thing become a way to "legally" sell forgeries?
Ruth Ball.jpg

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by Wymers Auction

Has this replica thing become a way to "legally" sell forgeries?
Attachment 70678

It's no more a forgery than any other type of commemorative item with an imprinted signature such as photos, prints, bats, team balls, etc.

I'm puzzled why people get themselves in such a tizzy about these. Not everyone can afford things like Tiffany Lamps, Ming Vases, granite countertops, Gibson Les Paul guitars and signed Ruth balls. So replicas or products that appear very similar are produced. The replicas should fool no one who is exercising a minimal amount of due diligence.

[Wymers Auction]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

It's no more a forgery than any other type of commemorative item with an imprinted signature such as photos, prints, bats, team balls, etc.

I'm puzzled why people get themselves in such a tizzy about these. Not everyone can afford things like Tiffany Lamps, Ming Vases, granite countertops, Gibson Les Paul guitars and signed Ruth balls. So replicas or products that appear very similar are produced. The replicas should fool no one who is exercising a minimal amount of due diligence.

Thanks Steve I see what you are saying, but let me give you another scenario. I am an auction house selling forgeries my fake Babe Ruth balls are getting hard to sell because folks are catching on. I toss the COA's in the garbage because they would be banned from Ebay and then list them on Ebay as replicas. I think a good deal of these forgeries are being passed on to crooked dealers anyways so what would it matter if they are called a replica. I would feel better if they were marked in some way on the ball as replicas. I myself would never buy a Babe Ruth ball without hours of research and seeking out qualified opinions, but that is not so for everyone. Let me reiterate Steve that I do respect your opinion on this.

[Mr. Zipper]

I do agree they should be indelibly stamped replica or copy, the same way replica coins are.

[thecatspajamas]

I can pretty much guarantee that the guys producing these things are not paying any licensing fees to MLB, the players' estates, or the ball manufacturers for using the players' "facsimile" signatures or reproducing the manufacturer's stamping on the ball. Even if they boldly state in all caps that these are replicas, every single one of them is a copyright/trademark violation. I used to take the time to report them as such to eBay, but after many many reports and never seeing any of the listings pulled, gave up.

If they were Gucci or Coach knock-offs, or reproductions of KISS merchandise, they would be pulled in a heartbeat, but those "brands" have hired personnel scouring eBay for unauthorized knock-offs and don't rely on reports from Joe Public to have eBay pull the listings.

The question of how much harm an obvious but unmarked reproduction does to the hobby is debatable (as evidenced by previous posts), but what really bothers me about these things is that guys like Graig Kreindler are hampered from reproducing and selling their own work because of licensing issues, yet these guys get away with it simply because they don't bother to follow proper channels. Nothing new I guess, but it still irks me every time I see one of these "unauthorized reproductions."