Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by BC on February 15, 2021 at 10:11am

Nice catch. That is concerning for sure and I'd avoid both based on that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Lewis on February 15, 2021 at 1:16pm

It almost looks like someone bumped the table the autopen was on……with my old eyes I can see two very slight differences. I would also avoid both.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Sosnowski on February 15, 2021 at 5:50pm

As I already told you, the PSA one is mine. I got it signed by Fox and later certified by PSA. I still own the piece, and it hasn't changed hands. Whatever is being sold otherwise has nothing to do with me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Lewis on February 15, 2021 at 7:07pm

Sorry, dillen or Nick, you said "I own an Michael j fox autograph but this one does not have a COA". Now you say it has been passed by PSA. I don't care about what company passed what ever autograph, it is always about the ink. I have a couple of M.J.F's signed seconds apart and they are far from identical. Every now and then lightning can strike in the same place twice. You brought up identical autographs….I only added an opinion and pointed not a single finger in your direction.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dillen on February 15, 2021 at 10:36pm

Hello David

I'm Dillen

Nick is the person that is selling the autograph on eBay and is commenting on this forum over an message that i send to him through eBay. 

We are not related 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dillen on February 16, 2021 at 5:27am

Hello Nick

Yes you told me that on ebay, and I also mensioned all of that in my opening message on this forum.

So what is your point?

I posted this on this forum beacause I wanted some other people opinions.

Fact is that the autograph that you are selling for $499,- on ebay is an exact 100% copy of another one that is sold online. That is strange (and in a normal world impossible) don't you agree?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Sosnowski on February 16, 2021 at 5:39am

Again, my point is, none of this has anything to do with my autograph. I know my autograph is authentic, I saw MJF sign it. I know the certification is real, I submitted it to PSA myself. Whatever else is being sold has nothing to do with me. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dillen on February 16, 2021 at 5:52am

If you got it  from someone else than it was maybe possible that yours was authentic and the other one was a copy of your autograph but if you say you got it personally, and it was only in your possession than there is no one that could make a copy.  and still we have an exact same 100% autograph twice......It's a miracle

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Sosnowski on February 16, 2021 at 6:01am

Again, I can only say what I know to be true. I got the PSA certified piece that you are questioning signed myself by MJF and I submitted it to PSA myself. The autograph was signed prior to 2013 and there has been a high quality photo on the internet since then. Whatever else is going on, clearly has nothing to do with me or my autograph. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dillen on February 16, 2021 at 10:05am

Perfect answer (after I mentioned the copy part)

If I had an  autograph that I  got in person and there was an exact same 100% autograph for sale I would not say (quote)"Whatever else is going on, clearly has nothing to do with me or my autograph"?????!!??

I would be very surprised and would like to know how that is possible..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JXE on February 16, 2021 at 2:24pm

There doesn't appear to be much of a mystery here. The JSA one is obviously a forgery of the PSA one. Looking at the PSA one, it is clear that there is ample evidence of it being a live signature that was signed by a human hand. The JSA forgery is lifeless, slow, and uniform with no variation in the angle of the marker. It's almost as if someone made an autopen template with the picture of the PSA one that's available online.

Notice how when you did the overlay of both signatures they lined up perfectly? Based on the fact that the PSA shot is taken from an angle, yet the JSA forgery is more of a head on shot, it is clear that the forgery of this autograph was captured from the photo of the autograph, not how the autograph itself would appear when scanned or looked at head on.

What I don't understand is the questioning of Nick, as if he can somehow enforce that no one uses images of autographs he is selling to create forgeries. I guess maybe watermarks could help us prevent this kind of thing when showing off our autographs, but it is certainly not expected of sellers with large inventories. I don't think that the authentic one is in any way tainted because someone used it to make a forgery, though. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dillen on February 16, 2021 at 11:00pm

Hello,

It  is possible that  the psa one is authentic..

The reason that i maybe am a bit sceptical  has to do with the answer i got (on ebay) when i asked about this other autograph.

But your right it could be that nick is just a victim of someone that has copied  his autograph.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page