Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 14 May 2024 Posts: 891 Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 5:11 pm Post subject:
tfm wrote:
Thanks Allan. After my DHSD experience I simply don't feel comfortable bidding there anymore. It broke my heart when I found out later that what I thought was a unique item was copied. It really put a shadow on the whole thing. I promised myself not to feel that again.
I haven't bought any of the big ticket manuscript / one of a kind type items but if anything, I think it should be disclosed which items copies have been made. I think Paul takes an archival copy of each paper item.
Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 19 Nov 2024 Posts: 231 Location: Wichita, KS
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:54 am Post subject:
tfm wrote:
Thanks Allan. After my DHSD experience I simply don't feel comfortable bidding there anymore. It broke my heart when I found out later that what I thought was a unique item was copied. It really put a shadow on the whole thing. I promised myself not to feel that again.
Joined: 11 Sep 2004 Last Visit: 28 Jun 2013 Posts: 2977 Location: NYC
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:16 pm Post subject:
You mean that you are buying the unpublished original materials that were copied by the original owner? Or does this mean you are getting a xerox copy of the original items?
Under any circumstances, I don't think those auctions confer publishing rights, no? I could understand why they might want to retain record of the item for future possible yet unlikely publication. _________________
Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 14 May 2024 Posts: 891 Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject:
bombadil wrote:
You mean to tell me it wasn't unique? A copy? Holy f-in' crap!
tfm can correct me if I am wrong but I think the issue is that DHSD is obviously a unique item and was sold as such. However, for all (?) of Paul's auctions, he takes an archive copy. I'm not sure if the original owner/author also took a copy for themselves as well. In any case, the original is the one that was sold but there are a couple of copies floating out there.
Whether this is good or bad would require some debate but I can understand the frustration after spending the big bucks to find out later that copies were made. I can understand the need / desire to make an archival copy as well so the item is not "lost" in someone's collection. But, when you consider the controversy caused by non original staples or a mismatched folder and book from the same print run or selling limited numbers of a photocopy of a manuscript, something like this should probably disclosed as well.
To be sure, this is a great item. It's one of the best in my collection. I put a bid of $2200 on it and got it for less than $1300, which I was thrilled. What was not thrilling was when I found out that the seller makes copies (with the author's permission) for archival purposes. I didn't know this until later. One of the qualities that made the Dungeon Hobby Shop Dungeon a top collectible in my mind was its uniqueness--that quality is gone. I can only assume that Kalibruhn and all of the other paper items that I've bought from the seller have also been duplicated.
Quote:
the controversy caused by non original staples
What's this about? _________________ "This is cool."
Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 27 Jan 2009 Posts: 52
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:12 pm Post subject:
tfm wrote:
I put a bid of $2200 on it and got it for less than $1300, which I was thrilled.
I'm still gnashing my teeth over that one, Kynan. I was standing on the rooftop of a house in Puerto Rico the night that auction ended, trying to get a connection with my cell phone to place a last-minute bid. Alas...
Anyway, it's a great item regardless. To the winner, the spoils. Congrats again. _________________ Let mirth prevail!
Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Last Visit: 22 Mar 2020 Posts: 4574 Location: In the House of the Cosmic Frog
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:26 pm Post subject:
Thanks. Like I said, it is a great item that belongs in the pantheon. I could not believe it when it didn't go any higher. Thanks Puerto Rico! _________________ "This is cool."
Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 19 Nov 2024 Posts: 231 Location: Wichita, KS
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject:
Mars wrote:
bombadil wrote:
You mean to tell me it wasn't unique? A copy? Holy f-in' crap!
tfm can correct me if I am wrong but I think the issue is that DHSD is obviously a unique item and was sold as such. However, for all (?) of Paul's auctions, he takes an archive copy. I'm not sure if the original owner/author also took a copy for themselves as well. In any case, the original is the one that was sold but there are a couple of copies floating out there.
I know for a fact that Paul has not done this on all of his auctions---I'm pretty sure that archiving is arranged with each author he works with, on a case-by-case basis. For example, none of Steve Marsh items were scanned, per his request; for others, like Rob Kuntz's works, Rob requested scans to be made so that he would be able to publish the original materials at a later date.
In any event, while I can see how this might upset some folks, I don't see how it's any different from illegal .pdfs out there: sure, you can find a Tsojconth if you look, but it's not the real thing, so what's the difference??
Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Last Visit: 22 Mar 2020 Posts: 4574 Location: In the House of the Cosmic Frog
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:14 pm Post subject:
There is no controversy. I felt odd suggesting that others bid in a situation in which I have recused myself, that's all. _________________ "This is cool."
Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Last Visit: 14 May 2024 Posts: 891 Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:30 pm Post subject:
tfm wrote:
What's this about?
I forget now if this actually came up in an auction or if it was all hypothetical. I seem to think that it was an issue with a woodgrain set but would have to do some digging to find out the details.
In any case, the discussion of rusty original staples vs replacement staples vs no staples at all has been had on the Acaeum and Dragonsfoot a couple of times now. The scenario being a rare item sold and is later determined to have had the staples replaced. The replacement of staples should have been disclosed but the big question is that, after the fact, how does this effect value or what compensation is adequate?
The Misty Isles book that I picked up did not have the staple (also no staple rust stains). However, there was at least one other person who probably would have won but did not bid simply because of the lack of staples. There was full disclosure on this on.
Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Last Visit: 22 Mar 2020 Posts: 4574 Location: In the House of the Cosmic Frog
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:24 pm Post subject:
There have been unintended controversies. My badge of honor is the ST1 I had listed awhile back. I have several of those with a couple of them being opposites of each other, one with nice cover and less than nice booklet and one with a nice booklet and not so nice cover. I put the less than with the less than and the nice with the nice. I had wanted to make a gift of the less than. There was somebody I knew who wanted one real bad but could never afford it. I was going to gift them the copy with the condition issues.
Well, you know how that turned out. It never occurred to me that trading components of the same item printed at the same time by the same people at the same location would be an issue. Selling game parts for the purpose of completing games with missing parts has been an industry standard for years. All of the game stores keep parts. I understand there's even a thread at that other site devoted to it. But the presumptions in the community always lean towards the nefarious. Anyway, I don't mind being the bad guy. It just makes me spend more money. _________________ "This is cool."
Joined: 11 Aug 2007 Last Visit: 09 Jun 2009 Posts: 102
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:36 am Post subject:
(...Because various people may be expecting me to post next, I guess!).
tfm wrote:
There have been unintended controversies. My badge of honor is the ST1 I had listed awhile back... But the presumptions in the community always lean towards the nefarious. Anyway, I don't mind being the bad guy. It just makes me spend more money.
First things first: sorry, Kynan, but you did somewhat hang yourself there, rather than being a "presumption towards the nefarious".
Sizeable starter bids were coming in on that sale (made under your alternate eBay handle) and I simply warned people to enquire about condition because the (visible) copy was not purchased "a few years ago" (as a single item) as the description read.
=> http://www.acaeum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=50379&highlight=#50379
When the condition question was asked on eBay and you replied "I've never seen an ST1 with staple rust. That would suck, so I'm glad you asked" (six posts down) that was the "red flag". No nefarious presumption required...
If there had been "full disclosure" at any stage, no problems.
The auction *should* have been "fun", as intended, and I would've been happier too had it turned out that way.
Anyhow... (& in the past, I guess).
re. DHSD. Yep; all of RJK's material was archived with Paul in copied form, afaik. There are positive aspects in that as well, IMHO, in that doing so guarantees the provenance should that ever be queried at a later date. And, if the worst comes to the worst, should the original ever be destroyed, the location of the research "backup" is known.
tfm wrote:
I put a bid of $2200 on it and got it for less than $1300, which I was thrilled. What was not thrilling was when I found out that the seller makes copies (with the author's permission) for archival purposes. I didn't know this until later. One of the qualities that made the Dungeon Hobby Shop Dungeon a top collectible in my mind was its uniqueness--that quality is gone.
*nods*. Can see where you're coming from on that, Kynan.
Does that mean I can request a double helping of empathy where I dropped a couple of weeks salary on the Supplement V (Kalibruhn) typescript believing it (for whatever reason) to be the only remaining/available artifact related to that, only to find out - when ToT opened to the public - the following link http://tomeoftreasures.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=410 ?
54 pages, in original format... *g*
Or maybe I just missed something in the auction wording...? *shrugs* I certainly don't recall missing an entire auction item, but if I did manage that somehow please do let me know. Memory ain't what it used to be, alas, and it never was brilliant in the first place.
Suffice to say that kinda killed any "uniqueness" aspect stone dead
(A more important aspect where the item *cannot* be reproduced at a later date owing to (c) issues - try releasing OD&D supplement V now and wait for the response...).
These things happen, I guess. ^^
But it can cut both ways: e.g. that I paid something like $15-20 for the original ms. clipped at/used as the basis for http://www.pied-piper-publishing.com/index.php/products/upcoming/pre-order . In that case, I'm more than happy *not* to have a "unique item", in that Rob's expansion will bring those items to the enjoyment of several hundred other players. ymmv...
Joined: 11 Sep 2004 Last Visit: 28 Jun 2013 Posts: 2977 Location: NYC
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:10 am Post subject:
I don't think it is unreasonable for the author to retain publication rights to these materials while selling the original to a collector for a premium. It is the same for me when pursuing original art used in illustration of published materials. I can own the original and TSR or the artist can continue to publish the image and distribute at their discretion unless I make different arrangements with the artist prior to the creation of the work.
These works, both written and visual, are originals under both circumstances and do retain their unique quality in spite of any publication history be it on a press or a copy machine. The collectible quality seems to me to remain intact. Granted, it would be more in the interest of these authors to make a disclaimer that they hold exclusive publication rights in Paul's auctions. This would serve to better protect their work primarily and inform the buyer secondarily.
I think you got a great artifact that no one else can claim, Kynan. A reproduction can't compare to the original that was used at the Dungeon Hobby Shop. _________________
Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Last Visit: 22 Mar 2020 Posts: 4574 Location: In the House of the Cosmic Frog
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:35 am Post subject:
Quote:
Does that mean I can request a double helping of empathy where I dropped a couple of weeks salary on the Supplement V (Kalibruhn) typescript believing it (for whatever reason) to be the only remaining/available artifact related to that, only to find out - when ToT opened to the public - the following link http://tomeoftreasures.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=410 ?
54 pages, in original format... *g*
I wanted that one bad, so I was disappointed to come up short. Needless to say I was thrilled when the Second Chance Offer came in for the original handwritten documents about 15 minutes after the auction closed.
But you of all people should get my point about the "morning after" feeling when one finds out the 'copy' surprise.
Quote:
I don't think it is unreasonable for the author to retain publication rights to these materials while selling the original to a collector for a premium.
I wasn't talking about that. I assume that the authors make copies of their originals before they are sold. It's their work. They own it. It's the idea of a third party copy that sits awkwardly. _________________ "This is cool."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Home
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
