Babe Ruth Ban Johnson Ball

[Nyygameused]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

And, of course, your opinion is just as good as fact.

We live in a country where stupidity and ignorance are prized, and an education is something to be derided. It's no wonder then that one would continually, consciously, and most of all, proudly, ignore important distinctions.

David I respect you as a collector, and would hope you value my opinion as much as I'd value yours. I'm just not a fan of the term "clubhouse" if a signature is not authentic, it's not authentic. Just one mans point of view, I am not attempting to persuade anyone to think alike.

[Nyygameused]

Hostility runs rampant on this forum I see

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Nyygameused

Hostility runs rampant on this forum I see

You are participating in a forum where people who know a lot more than you are giving you a free education. A better response would be "thank you".

[RichardSimon]

I was told this story by a friend so it is an anecdote but I think it is true.
A famed former player, a very controversial well known player, agreed verbally to a deal to sign 1000 autograph pieces for $5000 for someone he was friendly with. This guy was a photographer whose work was used by the card companies. (this incident took place quite a few years ago).
The guy shows up the next day lugging 1000 photos , balls, cards, etc.
He goes into the clubhouse to meet the player and the player arrives with two other people. The three of them sit down and start signing the players name.
The photographer is taken aback and after a few minutes he says "wait a minute, I paid you (pointing to the player) to sign, not these guys." The former player says, "don't worry, these guys can write my name as good as I can." The photographer keeps complaining, the former player throws the pen down and says "f--- this, I don't need this s--t" and he gets up with his guys and leaves.

[Lordstan]

Guys, Guys, Guys, Calm down.

Look, NO ONE is saying that a proxy signature is authentic. What is being said is this..
There are 2 different categories of unathentic autographs
1) Name signed by a person unknown or unathorized by the person whose name is being signed is a forgery. This auto is not authentic and illegal as the intent of signing the item is to defraud a purchaser out of money.

2) Name signed by a person who is authorized by the person whose name is being signed is a proxy. This auto is not authentic and not illegal with one exception, that I can think of. The reason it isn't illegal most times is that there is no purchase or money exchanged. A ball boy who signed a team ball for Ruth didn't do it so the kid getting the ball would pay more for it, but, more likely, to save the Babe some time or if the Babe had already let the clubhouse or if the Babe was "indisposed".
2a) The one exception is the one that has been described by others already. If the named person(player/celebrity) is being paid, by anyone, to sign items and tells, or pays, someone else to sign the items being paid for, and then represents to the party who is paying for them that he signed them all, then the named person is the one who committed fraud. I guess the person who signed the items could be held as an accessory to the fraud if they knew, but I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say for sure.

All the scenarios above result in autographs that are not authentic.
All the scenarios above result in autographs that may not be considered collectible by the autograph community.

The point being made by David, Steve, and Scott is that proxy sigs and forged sigs are different, even though both are not real.

Carmelo,
The reason you've received hostility is because you are kind of making up rules. What you are saying is like walking up to an animal expert and taking, and then refusing to budge, the position that Polar, Brown, Black, and Pandas are all the same, to you, because they are all bears. While it is true that they all are bears, it doesn't mean that there aren't real differences between them. It also doesn't mean that you want to get caught alone in the woods with any of them.
Same thing goes for proxy vs forged autographs. Both are not authentic, but there are real differences between them. This doesn't mean you want to collect either of them.

Shelly,
No one is saying what those players did is legal or right. What they did, in fact, is probably illegal. If the card companies are paying them to provide their own autographs and they provide something else, I think that would definitely be considered defrauding the company who paid them. The only difference is that the autos signed by the other people are defined as proxy signatures, because the player asked the person to sign it in their place.

Best to all,
Mark

[David Atkatz]

Extremely well put, Mark.

[shelly]

Mark, yes they broke every rule and yes the company should have done something to them.
That is why I tried to make it clear to the people on here that the companys did nothing. They packed up the cards and sold them to the public as authentic even when they where told what happened.
My question then becomes if the company knew that they where selling a proxy signiture does it then become a forgery because the company knows its not authentic.
It Sunday the world cup is not on yet I just want to kill some time

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by shelly

My question then becomes if the company knew that they where selling a proxy signiture does it then become a forgery because the company knows its not authentic.
It Sunday the world cup is not on yet I just want to kill some time

Hmmm. Good question.
The autographs were done with the knowledge of the person who is supposed to be signing, so it is still a proxy signature, BUT the entire situation is fraudulent. I think it could even be illegal as the card company is hoping to entice buyers to purchase packs to get an authentic autograph. If they KNOW the auto isn't authentic, I would think that would be fraud and illegal.
If the card company paid a third party to sign a bunch of cards, without informing and getting the player's consent, those would be forgeries and also fraudulent and illegal.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by shelly

My question then becomes if the company knew that they where selling a proxy signiture does it then become a forgery because the company knows its not authentic.
It Sunday the world cup is not on yet I just want to kill some time

No, Shelly. A proxy is a proxy. If it was authorized by the (supposed) signer it is a proxy. Period. But in the case where the "signer" was paid to provide a genuine autograph, but did not, fraud was committed. (But not by the person who put pen to paper, as in the case of forgery.)

It's really not very difficult.

[Nyygameused]

Originally Posted by Runscott

You are participating in a forum where people who know a lot more than you are giving you a free education. A better response would be "thank you".

Yes Scott, I bow down to everyone and their memorabilia wisdom and holiness.

[Nyygameused]

Totally agree mark, thank you.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Nyygameused

Yes Scott, I bow down to everyone and there memorabilia wisdom and holiness.

And here's a free grammar lesson, too: It's "their," not "there."

[Nyygameused]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

And here's a free grammar lesson, too: It's "their," not "there."

And an eye test for you sir, edited at 2:28.

[David Atkatz]

That's why I quoted you in my post. There's your error, appearing for all eternity.

Now, who needs that eye test?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Nyygameused

Yes Scott, I bow down to everyone and their memorabilia wisdom and holiness.

Keep going - I think there are still a couple of forum members you haven't yet gotten wise with.

[Nyygameused]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Keep going - I think there are still a couple of forum members you haven't yet gotten wise with.

Not the first time I've been called a wise guy.