Topps Sues Leaf Over "Best Of" Product!

[vwnut13]

Donruss was founded in 1954.
Donruss was purchased by General Mills.
Donruss was merged with Beatrice US Confections and Leaf in 1983.
Donruss/Leaf was purchased by Pinnacle Brands in 1996.
Pinnacle Brands filed for bankruptcy.
In 2001 Playoff Corp. became Donruss Playoff L.P.
Donruss Playoff was purchased by Panini in 2009.

May be a little incorrect, but thats the best wikipedia could do. :lol:

Donruss, Pinnacle, and Playoff, have all produced Leaf Trading cards. Leaf was first produced...by leaf.... in the 1950s.

 

[nosterbor]

i have read all 9 pages. here i my thought on this. when i first saw Leaf 2010 i thought WOW! Donruss/Leaf was back. then i was looking at the product and saw no licensing whatsoever. what ticked me off was the bait and switch tactic. that logo they use is the very same as the 90 leaf product that came out on the 90 leaf cards right down to the color! look at a box of 90 leaf. Topps wins, Leaf is done big time. look at the logo on this 92 Leaf card. Topps will us this also to show that the Now Leaf just uses what ever means possible to sell product. Leaf/Donruss are no longer.Topps is still here so you can not infringe on a still copyrighted product.

Remember these cards? 1994 Sports Edition. they were sued by baseball and the players union for copy right infringement.gone in a heart beat!

BY BY LEAF!

You really have no idea, do you.

No you don't. why don't you open a fast food burger joint with golden arches and call it McDowell's and see how long you last.

I've never considered banning based on ignorance until now. Congratulations

yes i was i ignorant when i bought the product 5 months ago. to find out it was not a licence product i was pissed.why did they not put a disclamer on the face of the box stating the is not an officially licensed product of MLB or the MLBPA.if so i would not have spend that kind of money on this product. so if you want to ban me for speaking my mind go ahead.this is all i will say on this thread!

 

[sportscardtheory]

What the heck product are you talking about?

 

[Bob Loblaw]

I would urge everyone to simply refrain from responding. Either he's really, really, really slow, or trolling for this type of response. Don't take this very interesting topic off topic by responding to this idiot.

 

[cgilmo]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

yes i was i ignorant when i bought the product 5 months ago. to find out it was not a licence product i was pissed.why did they not put a disclamer on the face of the box stating the is not an officially licensed product of MLB or the MLBPA.if so i would not have spend that kind of money on this product. so if you want to ban me for speaking my mind go ahead.this is all i will say on this thread!

It makes sense to be PO'd if you expected to get a licensed product - because its always been licensed in the past - but don't get a licensed product. Its not inappropriate now for someone to feel upset because they think Leaf infringed on a license, even if it was Topps' license to display Mantle's image, especially since there hasn't been a legal judgment yet.

On the other hand licensing has become a complete joke anyway if collectors let licenses tell them what's important and what to collect.

 

[Card Magnet]

Let's blame a company because we made an assumption about something without taking two minutes to go online and confirm/disprove that assumption!

 

[RZimm11]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

 

[metallicalex777]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

 

[deceptikon1978]

While reading through this thread, I had something relevant to say that I was going to post when I was done reading. Once I got to nosterbor's posts my brain got scrambled and I can't remember what I wanted to say.

Anyway, good luck to Leaf in getting this thing resolved quickly and painlessly.

 

[RZimm11]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

Exactly, it would take a lot of stickers to tell him what the product is NOT apparently. It is also not certified by the AARP, the NRA, or the Boy Scouts of America either (to my knowledge :lol: ).

 

[csmtampa]

LMAO

There are some high quality posts in this thread.

(This is not one of them :lol: )

 

[cgilmo]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

Exactly, it would take a lot of stickers to tell him what the product is NOT apparently. It is also not certified by the AARP, the NRA, or the Boy Scouts of America either (to my knowledge :lol: ).

However, it is down with OPP

 

[nyc3]

Nothing to do with anything, but figured it may lighten up the room :lol:
[youtube:jvwxe86b]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeCMCJc5-jg[/youtube:jvwxe86b]

 

[goldenegg1]

It could have been marked I can't believe it's not butter, because technically it's not butter.
I am now stupider for reading these last 11 pages .

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

Exactly, it would take a lot of stickers to tell him what the product is NOT apparently. It is also not certified by the AARP, the NRA, or the Boy Scouts of America either (to my knowledge :lol: ).

 

[hive17]

You guys clearly cannot appreciate nosterbor for what he is. I don't know what that is, but don't lose sleep over it. Always read everything he says, and then say: "anyway...."

 

[metallicalex777]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

Exactly, it would take a lot of stickers to tell him what the product is NOT apparently. It is also not certified by the AARP, the NRA, or the Boy Scouts of America either (to my knowledge :lol: ).

However, it is down with OPP

and every last lady!

 

[saferseas]

I actually think that whether or not Topps has a case is irrelevant.

Leaf is starting to gain some traction and Topps wants to kick the chair out from under them by tying them up with legal fees, etc. The victor in cases like this always seems to be the company with more money/resources; the smaller company having to settle after their resources are exhausted.

Some questions:
Did Razor Rookie Retro use Topps images to sell the product?
Shouldn't UD get in on this? I see the Jeter SP Rookie and SPx on the sell sheet. They probably need the money more than Topps.

 

[Card Magnet]

I actually think that whether or not Topps has a case is irrelevant.

Leaf is starting to gain some traction and Topps wants to kick the chair out from under them by tying them up with legal fees, etc. The victor in cases like this always seems to be the company with more money/resources; the smaller company having to settle after their resources are exhausted.

Some questions:
Did Razor Rookie Retro use Topps images to sell the product?
Shouldn't UD get in on this? I see the Jeter SP Rookie and SPx on the sell sheet. They probably need the money more than Topps.

I doubt UD can afford to get into it :lol: .

 

[alexs64]

nosterbor

what about the box made you think it was licensed

I think what he's crying about, is that since it was called Leaf, had the same logo, and the fact that Leaf had always been licensed IN THE PAST, and he did absolutely no research on it, it showed up out of the clear blue sky after a few years and he went ahead and decided to spend a crap-ton of money on it.

~Sounds logical, doesn't it.~

Sounds like somebody is forgetting to check for the MLB certified sticker when buying new product. Leaf has no purpose in putting a sticker on a retail box telling you they are not licensed...that is a given due to the fact there is no MLB certified sticker. Losing MLB licenses is nothing new anymore so IMO it is slightly shocking to hear "complaints" about not knowning what is MLB certified or not.

Exactly, it would take a lot of stickers to tell him what the product is NOT apparently. It is also not certified by the AARP, the NRA, or the Boy Scouts of America either (to my knowledge :lol: ).

However, it is down with OPP

Yeah you know me!