- Thread starter
- #1
Bob Loblaw
Active member
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Really? This was the only picture you could find, Topps?
- Thread starter Bob Loblaw
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
RL24
New member
Jaypers said:
The copyright extends beyond the logos and into color schemes and things like stripes. I think blah blahblah learned me that.
It seems to me like Topps was saying "neener neener look what we can do! use logos!" but I do know that in the real world they probably had no idea that the picture had already been used on a competitor's baseball card.
George_Calfas
Well-known member
Air rush on pants and top take away on spy's of a Phillies uniJaypers said:
tonsofcommons
Active member
Look at the difference in autos!
Mighty Bombjack
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 6,115
- 12
That was my first thought. I think two different people signed those.tonsofcommons said:
ThoseBackPages
New member
wow, the topps card LOOKS about 4000 times better
RL24
New member
Leaf said:
That could be true, but their license copyright thingy covers "names, nicknames, logos, uniform designs, color combinations, and slogans designating the Major League Baseball clubs and entities, and their respective mascots, events and exhibitions."
I know this from hanging out on these boards. I'm just saying that maybe somebody at Panini decided it would be in their best interst to take the stripe out for those reasons, because they were also aware of the rule, and it's probably a sensative issue around there after the 2008 Playoff vs MLB thing... Maybe they took it out because it would detract from the auto, but that seems like too much thinking about making a card the customer wants. I'm leaning towards they were covering their arses.
But who knows?
- Thread starter
- #10
Bob Loblaw
Active member
tonsofcommons said:
That's the auto he signed with Topps on their contract, around the same time he signed with Panini... which is why it mimics his Elite auto. Obviously, he changed his auto a little.
RL24 said:
I think I do.
The ONLY legal case that went to judgment by a court regarding airbrushed logos was: NBA PROPERTIES V. DAHLONEGA MINT (u.s. district court Georgia)
They found use of jerseys without logos does NOT infringe.
Until another decision contradicts this, it is the ONLY precedent on which one can form an educated opnion.
BG
- Thread starter
- #12
Bob Loblaw
Active member
Leaf said:
I don't know why they airbrushed the pants. It's really not a big deal. Also, we don't know the facts of that case -- what jersey did they use and how much of the logo was not utilized? Every case is different, Brian... and a court could rule that the striping on the pants was part of the Phillies minor league logo.
- Thread starter
- #13
Bob Loblaw
Active member
And, before I get a week's vacation for mentioning a $2 Hulk Hogan bid, please allow this thread to be evidence that I criticize whomever in the hobby I feel like criticizing, rather than go after one specific entity.
I was just emailing JP yesterday how I think in a year or two, some of the Metal cards are going to be skyrocketing.
I was just emailing JP yesterday how I think in a year or two, some of the Metal cards are going to be skyrocketing.
JoshHamilton
Well-known member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 12,205
- 320
Bob Loblaw said:
As do I, but people still think I'm a troll
IUjapander
New member
This happens a lot. Here are some examples from my collections.
- Thread starter
- #17
Bob Loblaw
Active member
vwnut13 said:
Instructional league jersey. I've seen close to 100 of this version of them, and own one (Domingo Santana's)...
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
As someone else said, Topps has always used the same images/pictures from year to year, as have other companies.
Similar threads
