The Collector's Trove: Ernie Gygax Collection Discussion
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 4 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author


Prolific Collector
Valuation Board

Posts: 681
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 29, 2022
Location: Denver, CO

Post Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:53 pm 
 

pleveich wrote:Thanks Paul! It arrived safely and is being framed for display in my library this evening. I was delighted to win this so cheaply. It is a great addition to the collection. My wife is a little miffed that I paid that amount for some that is only 12 x 9 though. I tried to explain the historical and collector value of the piece and the signatures, but she does not get it.  Oh well, I love her anyway!!!

John


** expired/removed eBay auction **




I just always point out that, for example, I had to pay $81 for it because someone else was convinced it was worth $80.  In other words the item could be immediately resold for your money back, if not a small profit.



Note - this point is best made as you're going out the door, so that her question of "So why don't you sell it?" bounces harmlessly away.   :lol:

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 30, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:12 am 
 

pleveich wrote:Thanks Paul! It arrived safely and is being framed for display in my library this evening. I was delighted to win this so cheaply. It is a great addition to the collection. My wife is a little miffed that I paid that amount for some that is only 12 x 9 though. I tried to explain the historical and collector value of the piece and the signatures, but she does not get it.  Oh well, I love her anyway!!!

John


** expired/removed eBay auction **




The item in question is easily worth $80 and is likely to get more valuable in the future.  Frame that baby!


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 137
Joined: Apr 23, 2005
Last Visit: Dec 18, 2014
Location: Edmond, OK

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:50 am 
 

darkseraphim wrote:
I just always point out that, for example, I had to pay $81 for it because someone else was convinced it was worth $80.  In other words the item could be immediately resold for your money back, if not a small profit.

Note - this point is best made as you're going out the door, so that her question of "So why don't you sell it?" bounces harmlessly away.   :lol:


Well, fortunately she has not asked me to resell it. I'm afraid that would invoke a disagreement of no small proportions. She is actually very good about not wanting me to resell stuff I have that would fetch a pretty penny like the error DMG which I could easily sell for a ton and a couple other one-of-a-kind D&D pieces I was lucky enough to acquire. All I have to do is get this stuff in the door and it is safe. She was even nice enough to grant me a small allowance to take to GenCon this year.

John


"Everyone is entitled to Al's opinion."


Last edited by pleveich on Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 137
Joined: Apr 23, 2005
Last Visit: Dec 18, 2014
Location: Edmond, OK

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:53 am 
 

FormCritic wrote:
The item in question is easily worth $80 and is likely to get more valuable in the future.  Frame that baby!


It is already framed and hanging above my modest D&D collection in the library. I was quite clever with it by having her decide the best spot to hang it up to give her a sense of ownership in it. I think she is warming up to my collecting habits - at least a little.

John


"Everyone is entitled to Al's opinion."

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5685
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 26, 2022
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:50 am 
 

FormCritic wrote:Only problem with the sale of such manuscripts as the Dungeon Hobby Shop Dungeon.....

Now a famous piece of RPG work is available for only one person to enjoy.  Auctions are quicker, but a pdf of the original might net the same amount of money for the game legend in question.  IF the pdfs were available at a reachable price, I know I'd be buying them.

Mark   8)


That is tantamount to copyright infringement. I would be super pissed if I paid a premium for a unique object and the seller offered PDF's of it. It is the prerogative of the owner of the piece to sell PDF's.


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6834
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Nov 25, 2022
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:31 am 
 

It wouldn't be copyright infringement if the seller were the copyright holder. Besides, is it not the same as Bottle City going to print after Mike spent $3600 of the original map and notes? I would consider it fair game for a seller to sell PDFs having already sold the original, just as I wasn't pissed when a second photocopy of City of the Revenant was put up for sale six months after I paid $600 for my copy. It is the seller's IP to do with as he sees fit, and I'm sure Paul would honour any request for refund if the buyer were unhappy with future developements, as would the IP owner.


This week I've been mostly eating . . . The white ones with the little red flecks in them.

 WWW  


Verbose Collector

Posts: 1686
Joined: Sep 03, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 20, 2022
Location: Portown

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:35 am 
 

Well, I believe the copyright stays with the original owner. Ernie retains the copyright to the actual words written in the adventure. I believe this was listed in the auction. The buyer of the auction owns only the physical item, and not the copyright on the words. Ernie would have to give permission to publish this as an adventure, or to sell copies of the pdf.

 WWW  


Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5736
Joined: Nov 16, 2002
Last Visit: Nov 26, 2022
Location: Wichita, KS, USA

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:14 pm 
 

zhowar wrote:Well, I believe the copyright stays with the original owner. Ernie retains the copyright to the actual words written in the adventure. I believe this was listed in the auction. The buyer of the auction owns only the physical item, and not the copyright on the words. Ernie would have to give permission to publish this as an adventure, or to sell copies of the pdf.


Quite correct :D


Allan Grohe ([email protected])
Greyhawk, grodog Style

Editor and Project Manager, Black Blade Publishing
https://www.facebook.com/BlackBladePublishing/

 WWW  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 764
Joined: Feb 05, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 20, 2022

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:32 pm 
 

Howdy,


mbassoc2003 wrote:It wouldn't be copyright infringement if the seller were the copyright holder. Besides, is it not the same as Bottle City going to print after Mike spent $3600 of the original map and notes? I would consider it fair game for a seller to sell PDFs having already sold the original, just as I wasn't pissed when a second photocopy of City of the Revenant was put up for sale six months after I paid $600 for my copy. It is the seller's IP to do with as he sees fit, and I'm sure Paul would honour any request for refund if the buyer were unhappy with future developements, as would the IP owner.


Exactly so. As stated in all of the auctions, ownership it is for the actual item, not the IP rights.

If the IP rights transferred to the owner of the physical copy you can bet that the item would have never been offered for auction in the first place. I'd say that about 75% of Rob's manuscript items would never have been sold if he knew he would have to give up the IP ownership. Of course, for the ms. of already published items the point is moot as the IP already belongs to somone else, e.g., Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure ms.

I think that is why most of the TSR fantasy art being held by collectors are rarely seen in public auctions. In most cases the owner of the artwork, both physical copies and copyrights, is TSR/Wizards/Hasbro. Offering prints for sale or using that artwork in new publications would be a big no-no I would think.


Futures Bright,

Paul


The Collector's Trove The online auction house that features the collections of game designers and artists.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 30, 2022

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:52 pm 
 

TSR used to purchase first publishing rights to artwork...like for the cover of Dragon, for instance.

At least that was their policy in the golden age.  Also, I would suppose that the work of staff artists would also belong to TSR.

Mark  8)


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 764
Joined: Feb 05, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 20, 2022

Post Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:35 pm 
 

Howdy,

FormCritic wrote:TSR used to purchase first publishing rights to artwork...like for the cover of Dragon, for instance.

At least that was their policy in the golden age.  Also, I would suppose that the work of staff artists would also belong to TSR.


The latter is incorrect, at least for the early days. According to Dave Sutherland it was all work done as employees. That is, TSR paid them a salary to do the art, they were not done as contract work and therefore the artists did not own them, the company did.

Dragon magazine covers done as contract art were different - unless done as a paid staff artist.


Futures Bright,

Paul


The Collector's Trove The online auction house that features the collections of game designers and artists.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5685
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 26, 2022
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:46 am 
 

I'm not sure I see the value in buying a "unique" item, then. If a cheap PDF can be knocked off at the whim of the original writer, does it not devaluate the "unique"? I'd compare it to the OB3/PDF issue, but OB3 is not unique, so the devaluation is minimal at best.


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6834
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Nov 25, 2022
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:53 am 
 

Deadlord39 wrote:I'm not sure I see the value in buying a "unique" item, then. If a cheap PDF can be knocked off at the whim of the original writer, does it not devaluate the "unique"? I'd compare it to the OB3/PDF issue, but OB3 is not unique, so the devaluation is minimal at best.

The only person in recent history who has experienced this is Improv. Perhaps he could give his insight into purchasing a 'unique' and later seeing it go to print?


This week I've been mostly eating . . . The white ones with the little red flecks in them.

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3804
Joined: Feb 23, 2005
Last Visit: Nov 14, 2022

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:21 am 
 

In my opinion, in that case it would only increase the value of the original.  Owning the manuscript to a published item that is well known among collectors increases the familiarity of the item and, thereby, interest in and collectibility of the original.


Let mirth prevail!

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 6118
Joined: May 03, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 16, 2022
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:32 pm 
 

I think how the item is evaluated definitely changes.  It starts off as being a truly unique item then goes to being an the manuscript version of a published item.  I would think that the latter item would not be as valuable.  I think you can do some kind of comparison of the Bottle City manuscript with some of the TSR stuff that have manuscripts like the R-series.

I think the biggest problem in this comparison is that the R-series modules themselves sell for a lot of money and are currently out of print.  With Bottle City, the products are just being released.

 WWW  


Sage Collector
JG Valuation Board

Posts: 2791
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 25, 2022
Location: Olde London Towne

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:32 pm 
 

I suppose it probably also depends on what the item is - for example, a photocopy of a piece which stays in the hands of the creator would be devalued if a finished printed version comes out.  If on the other hand, the manuscript was different from the finished version (perhaps revealing some of the author's thinking) that would keep a lot of its value.


Let's go fly a kite
Up to the highest height!

  


Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5736
Joined: Nov 16, 2002
Last Visit: Nov 26, 2022
Location: Wichita, KS, USA

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:40 pm 
 

red_bus wrote:I suppose it probably also depends on what the item is - for example, a photocopy of a piece which stays in the hands of the creator would be devalued if a finished printed version comes out.  If on the other hand, the manuscript was different from the finished version (perhaps revealing some of the author's thinking) that would keep a lot of its value.


I agree completely:  editorial revisions, notes, comments, changes, etc. show a lot of insight into the authorial creative processes; having the manuscripts in hand enables comparisons between published products and authorial/editorial manuscripts, which offers valuable insight into the writing and editing/production stages of books (whether literature or D&D books).


Allan Grohe ([email protected])
Greyhawk, grodog Style

Editor and Project Manager, Black Blade Publishing
https://www.facebook.com/BlackBladePublishing/

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5685
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 26, 2022
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 5:49 pm 
 

Oh, I agree wholly that a manuscript or piece that was later PUBLISHED would be worth the same or more. I'm taking about photocopies being sold off.
My mind being the fog bank that it is, I thought I recalled some problem last year with that same issue. I don't recall the details.


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 4 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5