Reproductions For Sale Honestly Described By Seller - Shows That There Are Collectors Who Buy Such

I call them 'people who care about the hobby'.
Don

This has been going on since the 19th century, which is why all those fake newspaper stamps exist. And also why many fake scarce or rare 19th century stamps, both US and foreign exist. They were not created to defraud anyone, but over time many did because the differences were small and many collectors did not know what to look for. These modern fakes should be easy to spot, the paper and impression should give them away immediately.

I see this topic as having two salient points;
1. Is it good for the hobby?
2. Is it ethical?

My opinion on for this particular listing(s)
1. Is it good for the hobby?
If the material is clearly described as being a reproduction/copy AND if the material itself is clearly marked (on back) as being a reproduction/copy then I have no heartburn with these listings.

2. Is it ethical?
If the seller is not using copyrighted material then I have no heartburn with these listings.
Don

The question not discussed here .......is who is buying this stuff and why ?

Let me answer that .......A high percentage is purchased by those who want to "swim" with the big boys . The other group is the one's who want to impress people .

It is those who put up "blurred picture " or long distance photo who wait until a discussion about Columbian's come up ,they want others to think they are advance collectors in the philatelic community .

There are others who know they can't come on here and impress the group here with their scans , but if the put them in plastic pages and pass it around for family and friends at the dinning room table they will impress everybody,especially if the spread a stamp catalog with prices around the table . They will be viewed by family and friends as some master collector and philatelic expert .

That's what I asked further up the thread. As well as, why pay twenty quid for a copy of an image from an auction catalogue? You can make your own copy for pennies if that's what you want.

GeoffHa ---Your right .....who pays $20.00 ,maybe to impress their children or your landscaper ,people know nothing about stamps but can read the catalog you hand them .

Maybe those who spend $1,000 at a strip club and then show their wife the "investment " they purchased for $1,000 that catalogs many thousands .....gets you off the hook for 20 quids .

No one has yet mentioned that these listings as shown violate ebay policy in that the items in question are not indelibly marked as fakes or reproductions.

While I would not want to see contemporary fakes, e.g., Sperati marked so, as they have inherent value and collectibility unto themselves, I think that these modern fakes should be marked as such.

Given that these are not actually stamps stuck onto paper in three dimensions, rather just a two dimensional color image there seems zero need to so label them. Are you saying the person who make (or made) wonderful stamp reproductions by carving them into large pieces of wood needs to label the wood, not a stamp?

Every photograph of Betty Page listed on ebay does not require it to be marked, you are not purchasing the actual Betty Page (or her bones) but just a photographic image of a three dimensional object and objects.

Yes you can copy your own auction catalog IF you have to have the catalog you wish to copy. Obtaining the catalog in question well after it original intended time period of use is more costly than the copies offered; without discussing the added cost of actually making the copy after obtaining the catalog.

If you're selling it in the crafts, woodworking, or some other ebay category, then no. However, if you are listing it in the Stamps hierarchy of categories, then yes.

Same thing goes with currency and coins. If you are selling items within those categories, they have very specific rules that don't necessarily apply if you are selling the same items outside those categories.

You don't need the hard copy catalog. The images are on Siegel's website and that is where they were taken from no doubt, free of charge.

There used to be (maybe there still is) a scam on ebay where they would sell "digital photo of <expensive piece of computer hardware>", the listing was very clear that you were buying a digital photo and not the actual hardware but there were lots of sales, apparently by bots who would auto purchase based on image recognition (or maybe overseas buyers who didn't understand the listing). Pay $100 for a digital photo of $1,000 piece of hardware and seller would email you photo of hardware exactly as described. Buyer couldn't complain because seller delivered exactly what they were advertising.

I initially was skeptical this particular listing was selling only photocopy as other forum members pointed out, but reading the feedback for this seller it is very clear that is what they're doing. Really scammy if you ask me. I am surprised they have only received a couple of negative feedbacks on this. One in Spanish calls them out, seller responds, "No es fotocopia es IMPRESION, no quiera comprar falso por verdadero." Not sure exactly what is difference between a photocopy and an IMPRESSION. But I guess technically speaking seller is providing "reproduction" as described. Really disappointing. Seller is international and appears to sell all over the world, it is surprising to me this has not caused more "misunderstandings". I think English speaking world is more forgiving of stuff like this than most. When I read the listing (which BTW was sold yesterday, and no longer listed), there is nothing to indicate it is photocopy; if I purchased this, I would have expected to receive an actual (fake) cover with actual (but fake) stamps pasted on..and I would have been very diappointed to receive a photocopy (or an "impression"..whatever that may be)

Y

Photocopy vs. print.

My use of the word "impression" refers to the quality of the print itself. The issued stamps will usually have a much higher quality look to them then these modern reproductions.

To clarify, the quote appears to refer to the Spanish feedback mentioned by Joshspif




I suspect that was "quería" or intended as such and not "quiera" as the subjunctive does not make much sense.