I understand the argument, but PSA doesn’t offer a financial guarantee for custom encapsulation. So there’s no liability on their end, and their custom service is supposed to be for people who want their cases on items they won’t grade. Now they’re taking that service away because of the implication that it’ll be used in the wrong manner, I’m sorry but I don’t agree.
It’s like the tide pods debate. Just because people are stupid enough to eat them, doesn’t mean the product needs to be banned; just because people are stupid enough to put a premium on something that doesn’t matter, doesn’t mean the company needs to remove the service.
Definitely! Documentation is the issue. When PSA encapsulates a card, they’re not just encapsulating it, they’re deeming it authentic. Since FPO cards were never meant to be released, there is no documentation to support their authenticity; therefore, I understand why PSA stopped encapsulating them. They don’t want to lend their prized stamp of authenticity to something they can’t prove is real.
Of course…had I thought this through beforehand, I wouldn’t have sent mine in. Lesson learned! These 2 beauties will have to settle for Pro Mold living space.
Except we’re talking about the non graded/authenticated cases. No documentation is needed nor asked for by PSA for that service. Read cullers post above.
I understand where PSA comes from on this though 100%. It makes perfect sense that PSA would not encapsulate (even custom) “FPO” or “matchprint” cards. They had no official release. They are not documented. Their existence was through backdoor, unofficial and highly questionable channels. It is a joke honestly that PSA ever encapsulated and graded them to begin with.
I doubt they would encapsulate any “custom” card for the same reasons, and rightfully so. They contain copyrighted and trademarked images/names and they have no way to verify their release. Again, that is when it comes to “FPO”, “Custom”, “Matchprint” or even your favorite Gary the “dead collectible” that is the “prerelease raichu”. Even though in the case of custom encapsulation there is no authentication aspect (hence why they can encapsulate any baseball/soccer etc. youth photos/cards that many teams typically make), there is still an inherent obligation for PSA to not even remotely legitimize in any way something that may be infringing on copyright or trademark.
Honestly IMO the fact that PSA ever graded FPO cards is a huge embarrassment to them. The fact that later they decided to custom encapsulate was only further inappropriate. I mean does anyone think they should start custom encapsulating the “custom” illustrators or shining zards etc? I’d hope not.
This is a better argument with copyright infringment/custom cards argument. However, PSA has demonstrated that you can have custom artwork with proprietary characters get encapsulated.
I’m not sure if I’m fully convinced that custom cards shouldn’t be encapsulated, as they’re still not authenticating the cards as real, but I’m more on the fence after reading this.
Let me pose this question. Where will the line be drawn?
Should PSA custom encapsulate fake cards? Should I be able to buy a counterfeit illustrator and send it in to encapsulate? Should PSA custom encapsulate a real card with an obviously forged Arita signature? What about a PR Raichu, regardless if the stamp is real?
The issue is that PSA’s brand is intended to be associated with authenticity. When PSA decides to encapsulate a card, their brand is attached to the card. If someone decided to custom encapsulate and sell a bunch of illegitimate cards, it damages the PSA brand.
So again, where should the line be drawn? Although the FPO cards are generally regarded as legitimate, PSA does not recognize them as something that can be authenticated. This is where they drew the line. If they start custom encapsulating FPOs, why not do all the other cards I listed above too?
Personally, if I ran PSA, I would not custom encapsulate any item that even slightly resembles something that could otherwise be authenticated and graded.
@cullers@garyis2000 I guess the real question comes down to whether or not if I were to do my best to imitate a “custom” 1st edition base charizard and an illustrator, do you think PSA should custom encapsulate those with whatever I say to put for text on top? (because people out there do that)
I think it is a resounding “HELL-TO-THE-NO” and I think given the shady release of cards like pre-rai, matchprint, FPO, square cuts and other “dead collectibles” and on to so called “custom” cards that PSA shouldn’t touch any of these with a 20 foot pole regardless of authentication or custom encapsulation.
@pkmnflyingmaster great post and I 100% agree. It is common sense.
If anything contains/involves IP/trademarked material (intellectual property) of ANY kind whatsoever and they will not authenticate it, then they should NOT encapsulate it for any reason, custom or not.
I think the real thing for me is what is the custom encapsulation service meant for.
According to PSA’s website it’s:
*Encapsulate your birth announcements, wedding invitations or youth sports cards and give your important personal milestones a quality, finished presentation.
A special green label allows you to personalize the information printed on the insert. Four lines (a maximum of 29 characters per line) are available for you to customize the description.*
So they have youth sports cards in there, which isn’t an offical card, and is definatly custom made. Now does PSA have a stance against Proprietary cards for their encapsulation service? If yes, then I’d agree. However, if they’re willing to encapsulate custom artwork with proprietary characters it’s hard for me to think they have that as part of their company stance, or they’re not being consistant with it. It’s a gray line for me and I’m not sure where I really stand on the line.
PSA will authenticate an Authentic signature on a reprinted sport card. Similar to when they authenticate a signature on a napkin or cut of paper. This would be the arita pikas above. They aren’t actual trophy cards, they are authentic artwork done by the artist. A grey area, but the key being the authenticity is based around the signer, not claiming the item is an official card.
The converse shouldn’t occur, grading any card with a fake signature. In fact before the pokemon signers were in their database, this is what would occur.
As for custom encapsulating a fake card, that would be suicide. I can’t imagine this would be a reality.
This is essentually my point, they’re willing to encapsulate proprietray artwork. Yes Arita created the orginal art, but he signed over the rights, so the artwork done shouldn’t be encapsulated. If the argument is they should have proprietary art inside a case. Then how can you make an exception when theirs a signature from someone? How can you make one stance without breaking the other. I would also point out that FPO cards techincally have copyright info on the cards, which is another gray area to explore.
Ultimatly non of us have to make this decision, it’s all up to PSA as they’re a privatly owned company. Their stance is laid out.
@cullers a youth sports card is a photograph made often times with permission of the team and not using any IP, nor infringing on any trademark or other registered property. That is “custom” in the purer sense of the word in that it is custom work not in any shady (or illegal) sense. As @smpratte has documented in many videos “custom” in the Pokemon world is often just used to be synonymous with counterfeit or fraudulent.
@smpratte on your comment I was unaware that PSA authenticates sport cards that are fake with signatures. I think that is asinine personally. Do you agree with that practice? I don’t think that or the converse should happen at all. If a real signature on a fake card is okay, why is a fake signature on a real card not okay? Especially when authenticating cards is much more easy to do than authenticating signatures, which is FAR more subjective.
@gottaketchumall The athlete I saw this with was Gretzky. There are a couple authorized legitimate reprints for that card. One that comes to mind is the 25th anniversary reprint.
IF PSA authenticated a real signature on an unauthorized reprint, I agree it is a grey area I personally wouldn’t touch. However the unauthorized reprints in sports are a complete joke. Almost entirely worthless.
Ah ok, again I was unaware of the whole circumstance @smpratte, but is PSA’s authentication limited to authorized reprints only? That is an entirely different ballgame than what I had imagined. For some reason when I saw “reprint” in your original comment I was thinking of fakes/counterfeits/customs/what have you.
It was cringe inducing to think of someone having the audacity to 1: bring a counterfeit card to a person to sign, 2. have PSA authenticate that abomination of a signed fake/counterfeit/custom. I could only think of someone like UL filming themselves going to arita with a “custom” charizard and somehow arita agreeing to sign it and then PSA agreeing to authenticate it. Every step of which is more cringe inducing than the last.
As long as it it was all authorized it would be as legitimate as getting an evolutions charizard signed in place of a base set. No trouble in that.
