PSA Card Guarantee

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

IMO you could probably disclose it in most cases and do just fine. You and I are from the generation where it mattered, but I don't think it does any more to a huge swath of the hoibby.

Nailed it

[JeremyW]

"How do you forensically prove anything with the card in a holder?"

They do it all the time at Blowout. Obvious trims & recoloring. Is that not forensic?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

"How do you forensically prove anything with the card in a holder?"

They do it all the time at Blowout. Obvious trims & recoloring. Is that not forensic?

In a trial, who is the collector going to call as a witness, an anonymous poster from BODA? In court it has to be done under strict rules of evidence. Different animal altogether. You could try it through an expert I suppose. In my opinion this card is the same card as the card in this online photo which I've never seen, and it appears to have been trimmed after that photo was taken. Good luck with that.

[JeremyW]

The photo evidence is so obvious. Does it take a jury to confirm?

[JeremyW]

I'm guessing a jury would confirm within an hour.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

I'm guessing a jury would confirm within an hour.

If these were easy cases you would have seen the government pursue them, IMO. It's easy to do this in an internet forum, not necessarily so easy in a court governed by rules of evidence.

[JeremyW]

Sounds like we a have a problem in the courts.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

The photo evidence is so obvious. Does it take a jury to confirm?

I am not sure I follow the question? Are you asking whether a judge would find for the collector on a motion for summary judgment? I can't imagine that would be the case. You would also need to think about how you even get the photos into evidence. They aren't "self authenticating."

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In a trial, who is the collector going to call as a witness, an anonymous poster from BODA? In court it has to be done under strict rules of evidence. Different animal altogether. You could try it through an expert I suppose. In my opinion this card is the same card as the card in this online photo which I've never seen, and it appears to have been trimmed after that photo was taken. Good luck with that.

Is there a good explanation of those rules that a non lawyer can easily understand?

To me, I'm thinking you'd have provenance on an earlier image. And for some, fairly clear identifiers.
Like
This card with PSA serial number X was shown in this image when it was offered on x date by this particular seller.
Theres a unique wood fiber inclusion visible just here further identifying the card.
That image is X dpi, making that fiber x distance from the nearest edge


This image is a new image created on x date, and at the same dpi as the original. Note the unique fiber inclusion is now Y distance from the nearest edge.

This is the actual card, as shown.

That could be done for all edges and overall size.

Would it not be allowed?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Is there a good explanation of those rules that a non lawyer can easily understand?

To me, I'm thinking you'd have provenance on an earlier image. And for some, fairly clear identifiers.
Like
This card with PSA serial number X was shown in this image when it was offered on x date by this particular seller.
Theres a unique wood fiber inclusion visible just here further identifying the card.
That image is X dpi, making that fiber x distance from the nearest edge


This image is a new image created on x date, and at the same dpi as the original. Note the unique fiber inclusion is now Y distance from the nearest edge.

This is the actual card, as shown.

That could be done for all edges and overall size.

Would it not be allowed?

I assume you would have an expert witness try to do all this. Who would that be? If so, here are the applicable standards at least in a federal court:

Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:

(a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;

(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;

(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and

(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

One issue I see right away is (c), because comparison with prior photos is not how anyone in the industry authenticates cards. So you would have an initial substantial hurdle of trying to persuade a judge that this new method was reliable.

[steve B]

I think I can see how it works.

I was thinking probably too narrow, identifying that two pictured objects are in fact the same object, and that it got smaller between two different dates.

But it would have to include info about how the edge quality changed, and other things. And since they're all related as "proof" if one was disallowed, the rest are far less useful. Like if you can show the edge quality doesn't match original examples, but can't show that the card got smaller between dates, the edge info won't matter. Or the other way around.

So you'd probably need multiple experts? In my limited experience, people have a hard time grasping someone being a generalist, however knowledgeable.

It seems odd to me that if someone like PSA used a flawed method of determining trimming, then that becomes the standard method.... I guess one of those "things get strange sometimes" things.

[Yoda]

I have often wondered if by some unlikely scenario THE t206 PSA 001 Honus ever ended up in an authentic holder, where it belongs, what would it fetch at auction?

I guess there would be some kind of drop but the publicity, history and prior ownership would keep its' valuation in the stratosphere.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I assume you would have an expert witness try to do all this. Who would that be? If so, here are the applicable standards at least in a federal court:

Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:

(a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;

(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;

(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and

(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

One issue I see right away is (c), because comparison with prior photos is not how anyone in the industry authenticates cards. So you would have an initial substantial hurdle of trying to persuade a judge that this new method was reliable.

I think you'd have a much more difficult time convincing a jury that even the act of trimming->regrading->reselling a card is a crime.

I've had multiple people tell me that even cleaning cards is "wrong" and/or criminal behavior. I honestly just laugh and roll my eyes whenever I hear that. They come across to me as completely delusional. And I'm certainly in the majority viewpoint in this hobby today. But as soon as you step outside this hobby, the distribution of opinions immediately sways *much* more heavily in the direction of "who cares?" than it does "that's fraud!". I strongly suspect that any jury you'd ever encounter would view card doctoring of all stripes the exact same way. Even with the most egregious of acts like trimming.

Inside this hobby, we hear things like "fraudster!", "card molester!", "scum of the hobby!", etc. But outside the hobby, all you hear is, "clever!", "haha, sounds like he found a loophole!", and "smart!". Nobody else thinks this is fraud. Just us. And a (likely small) subset of us at that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I think you'd have a much more difficult time convincing a jury that even the act of trimming->regrading->reselling a card is a crime.

I've had multiple people tell me that even cleaning cards is "wrong" and/or criminal behavior. I honestly just laugh and roll my eyes whenever I hear that. They come across to me as completely delusional. And I'm certainly in the majority viewpoint in this hobby today. But as soon as you step outside this hobby, the distribution of opinions immediately sways *much* more heavily in the direction of "who cares?" than it does "that's fraud!". I strongly suspect that any jury you'd ever encounter would view card doctoring of all stripes the exact same way. Even with the most egregious of acts like trimming.

Inside this hobby, we hear things like "fraudster!", "card molester!", "scum of the hobby!", etc. But outside the hobby, all you hear is, "clever!", "haha, sounds like he found a loophole!", and "smart!". Nobody else thinks this is fraud. Just us. And a (likely small) subset of us at that.

We're talking here though about a civil case against PSA on its guarantee, not a criminal trial for card doctoring.