Who looks at Hauls Of Shame website

[Rich Klein]

I read it. Peter is a great researcher but his vendettas don't help the hobby. As the old saying used to be "If only he could use his powers for good"

BTW -- Web sites don't take much money to operate.

Rich

[Runscott]

I agree with Rich. I have read most of 'his' Babe Ruth stuff. Once I found that he had posted one of my tips that was previously unknown to the hobby, crediting it to someone else, I couldn't resist seeing what he would plagiarize next. He did the same with information we posted here regarding the SACO baseball cdv that was quite probably seriously altered.

If he really wanted to win honest hobbyists over to his new-turned leaf, he would not be plagiarizing our work.

[Fred]

Wouldn't the author of the website be in deep poo poo if all (any or most) of what is written is false? Wouldn't the author be opening himself up to a libel suit?

Do I want to believe any of it's true? No.

Do I feel any of it is true? Yes.

Can any of the attorneys here comment on this? Is there a statute of limitations on theft of this type of material? If there is, doesn't that only mean that the perpetrator of the crime cannot be charged? Doesn't the article in question still belong to the original owner, even though the statutes of limitation for the theft has passed? Wouldn't/shouldn't the article be returned to the rightful owner if it is found or recovered?

[Fred]

Jeff,

Do you have a moment to comment? Would be greatly appreciated.

Originally Posted by Fred

Wouldn't the author of the website be in deep poo poo if all (any or most) of what is written is false? Wouldn't the author be opening himself up to a libel suit?

Do I want to believe any of it's true? No.

Do I feel any of it is true? Yes.

Can any of the attorneys here comment on this? Is there a statute of limitations on theft of this type of material? If there is, doesn't that only mean that the perpetrator of the crime cannot be charged? Doesn't the article in question still belong to the original owner, even though the statutes of limitation for the theft has passed? Wouldn't/shouldn't the article be returned to the rightful owner if it is found or recovered?

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Fred

Jeff,

Do you have a moment to comment? Would be greatly appreciated.

Fred, it looks like it varies by state.

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal...mitations.html

[Fred]

Yes, I can understand the statutes vary by state but I was wondering about the ownership of the cards. Even if the perpetrator can't be prosecuted, doesn't the material still belong to the rightful owner? And if the material surfaces somewhere, can the rightful owner sue to regain possesion?

Also, if what is posted on the website isn't true, can the author be sued for libel? If that's the case then why hasn't he been sued?

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Fred

Yes, I can understand the statutes vary by state but I was wondering about the ownership of the cards. Even if the perpetrator can't be prosecuted, doesn't the material still belong to the rightful owner? And if the material surfaces somewhere, can the rightful owner sue to regain possesion?

Also, if what is posted on the website isn't true, can the author be sued for libel? If that's the case then why hasn't he been sued?

I'm not sure I know anyone in this hobby who has been sued more than Peter Nash. And what are you going to do if you win? I think REA has his wallet tied up for the next 100 years.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I'm not sure I know anyone in this hobby who has been sued more than Peter Nash. And what are you going to do if you win? I think REA has his wallet tied up for the next 100 years.

Sometimes potential plaintiffs feel that they'll never be able to collect on a libel judgment so they don't bother to sue; other times, when someone is accused of being a massive shill bidder in auctions he'll just fake outrage and do nothing -- because truth is a defense to a charge of libel. You know, like last night.