Rock & Roll star claiming autograph authenticated by TWO eBay-endorsed companies is not real.

[AutographSeller]

But in the end, without acknowledgement by the writer, those authentications are merely opinion. Personally, when a celeb is alive and denies the authenticity,regardless of your claim as the reason for the denial, I would accept the celebs statement over some party that claims to be able to determine if a signature is authentic.

Yeah, I get that, but it's an appeal to authority. Most people would think that way, even though the expert would in fact be more aware of the persons past writing styles than the very celeb him/herself. And yes, these auth companies do make mistakes and get it wrong. I have a close friend who was a child actor and had an 8x10 he had gotten signed 30 years prior by his co-star, who was a major TV & Hollywood legend. My friend sent it to PSA and they rejected it, saying they felt it was not authentic. I also know they've made mistakes by authenticating things that were signed after someone died. It happens. But the top two companies looking at the same item three times? Doubtful.

 

[AutographSeller]

You got one of the Roberts? Or is it the Paul? Come on Dude!! Ya killing me here!

Sorry, but I will give you a Gilmour story that you'll prob hate: Gilmour refuses to sign anything that Waters has signed, guy is a real ass about it. Guy I know chases him down at the Roosevelt hotel in Hollywood to get a signature. He has the balls to get in the elevator with Gilmour and rides it all the way up to his floor. He's holding a pic of himself, talking to Gilmour , backstage at a Pink Floyd concert, when the guy was a little kid and his dad took him. Gilmour refused to sign it for him.

 

[quincy]

That is one of the challenges in selling autographed memorabilia.

The signed memorabilia is only as good as the authenticators - and the authenticators are not always good - or (as the class action lawsuits have alleged) honest.

I do not see that you have any legal action to pursue - not against eBay (a site that can prevent whatever sales it wants to prevent) or against the authenticators (who said your autograph was authentic but they are not infallible) or against the rock star (because he is, after all, the one who knows his signature best).

If you think you have a legal action to pursue that none of us are seeing from this distance, I suggest you sit down with an attorney in your area to see if that attorney can see a legal action that we don't.

Good luck.

 

[justalayman]

Your complaint, however, is not with the authentication companies. The autograph was authenticated.

Your complaint is with the celebrity who said the authenticators were wrong.

Even if there were a dozen other authenticators stating that in their opinion the autograph is that of the rock star, if the rock star denies it is his signature, eBay will still pull the sale.

And I believe rightfully so. As I said previously,unless a signature is authenticated via a witness to the writing, everything else is merely the authenticator’s opinion. Personally I would tend to accept the celebrity’s statement over somebody trying to make everybody believe they have some special ability to determine whether some writing is actually the work of the claimed author. Unless the signer is sTrump, who has proven himself a liar, I would tend to take the claimed signer over the person claiming to have the skill to determine the celebrity is lying

 

[Just Blue]

Sorry, but I will give you a Gilmour story that you'll prob hate: Gilmour refuses to sign anything that Waters has signed, guy is a real ass about it. Guy I know chases him down at the Roosevelt hotel in Hollywood to get a signature. He has the balls to get in the elevator with Gilmour and rides it all the way up to his floor. He's holding a pic of himself, talking to Gilmour , backstage at a Pink Floyd concert, when the guy was a little kid and his dad took him. Gilmour refused to sign it for him.

Not surprising. They truly hate each other. IMHO Pink Floyd is the most interesting band in the history of rock. Genius.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Stevef, wrong thread maybe?

Nope. A business engaging in unfair or deceptive practices.

 

[justalayman]

Nope. A business engaging in unfair or deceptive practices.

What business are you referring to? I don’t see any business in this thread that fits those possibilities.

 

[quincy]

Stevef, that doesn't seem to apply here because the rock star is saying the opposite of what the eBay authenticators are saying. Unless you think the rock star is trying to limit the number of autographs on the market to inflate prices, I see no deceptive or unfair practices.

Authenticating an autograph with nothing but an authenticator or two saying the autograph is authentic is never going to be as strong as authenticating an autograph with several pieces of evidence to support the authenticity.

An autograph of an author signed in a copy of the author's book with a date that corresponds to a book signing will always be better than a signature on a plain piece of paper said to be authentic by someone comparing one signature to another.

Personal photos taken with a celebrity at an event to go along with the celebrity's autograph will always be better than an autograph authenticated by a comparison of signatures alone.

Knowing, and being able to demonstrate, the history of an autograph, in other words, is the best way to sell autographed memorabilia.

I see no lawsuit for AutographSeller here. I only see eBay very wisely trying to avoid a lawsuit by pulling a disputed item from its site.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

My point is that we still don't know the state. I'm also amazed at what I see filed under the umbrella of the consumer protection statute here. I also have a real problem with someone falsely claiming a competitor's product is a fake.

 

[FlyingRon]

First off while the lawsuit mentioned might argue the "cuthroat" nature. The suit is of little relevance otherwise here. It's whether anti-SLAPP laws applied in this case.

Frankly, there's no "competitor's product." A celebrity is free to disclaim attachment of items to his "fame" even if he has an ulterior motive for doing so.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Unless an authenticator is willing to stand behind their statements financially I've never seen the point.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Frankly, there's no "competitor's product."

I disagree, and would have no fear of a rule 11 issue by signing my name to the complaint.

 

[quincy]

I disagree, and would have no fear of a rule 11 issue by signing my name to the complaint.

The only possible competitor here is the celebrity.

I am not seeing any legal action available. It would be next to impossible to win a lawsuit against the celebrity, challenging the authenticity of the celebrity's autograph when the celebrity says it is not authentic.

FlyingRon, the link to the lawsuit was to show the parties involved and not for that particular anti-SLAPP decision. The class actions are Todd Mueller, et al, v Collectors Universe Inc, et al, Case No.8:15-cv-0116; and Nelson Deedle, et al, v Collectors Universe Inc, et al, Case No. 2:15-cv-0528, US District Court for the Central District of California.

But the issues that led to the suits do not apply here. Here you have eBay telling AutographSeller he can't sell the autograph on their site even though the eBay authenticators have authenticated the autograph.

eBay has the right to deny sellers from selling anything. The authenticators did not prevent the sale by saying the autograph was not authentic. The celebrity did that.

All perfectly legal.

Again, AutographSeller's only recourse that I see is to sell the autograph elsewhere, perhaps with the eBay authentication and perhaps with the caveat that the celebrity denies the autograph's legitimacy.

As mentioned before, it is a problem buying memorabilia with just an authenticator's certificate of authenticity. Authenticators can get it wrong. It appears as if they might have gotten it wrong here.

 

[justalayman]

My point is that we still don't know the state. I'm also amazed at what I see filed under the umbrella of the consumer protection statute here. I also have a real problem with someone falsely claiming a competitor's product is a fake.

What competitor? You have one person claiming authenticity of the signature and the person whose signature it is claimed to be saying it isn’t his. Who is the competitor in this situation? A person stating a claimed autograph is not really his is not a competitor.

 

[quincy]

What competitor? You have one person claiming authenticity of the signature and the person whose signature it is claimed to be saying it isn’t his. Who is the competitor in this situation? A person stating a claimed autograph is not really his is not a competitor.

Exactly. There is nothing to support a suit against the celebrity - or anyone else.

AutographSeller can discuss the matter with an attorney in his area - but I am not sure what the attorney can see that we can't, based on the facts as presented here.