Fake card: what would TMD do?

[Dozer]

Fake is a matter of perception anyway. If something is an objectively undetectable fake, it's real for all intents an puposes.

Supported. If a fake is so good that nobody recognizes it, it becomes the real thing.

That seems not to be the case here, though, but you do not sound entirely convinced that the card is, in fact, a fake. Try to ascertain that, and then go to the seller and get a refund. Or, just keep playing with the card as if it is real. I don't see a problem with that. It seems to be so good that only a close inspection gives some telltale details, but nothing for sure, really... so keep playing with it. At least that gets you the play value of the card.

Unless the seller refunds you, you'll have to accept the value loss. As for selling it, I had re-backed CE power a couple of years ago which I sold to people with the explicit warning that they were, in fact, re-backed CE. The cards even were noticeably thicker, so one touch would confirm, and of course you couldn't see the blue glue line anymore. The persons I sold to (in person and face to face, at Worlds Berlin) did not really care. I have no problem with putting these cards into the secondary market, since re-backed CE is readily appearent.

To come full circle: If it hadn't been readily appearent (and I know you can re-back so that it doesn't show), I'd still have told them, but charged a higher price since they'd have purchased playable cards. Not the full P9 amount, mind you, but still. As Bram said: The better the fake, the higher its value, as long as you're truthful about it when selling.

Dozer

[Godder]

Fake is a matter of perception anyway. If something is an objectively undetectable fake, it's real for all intents an puposes.

Supported. If a fake is so good that nobody recognizes it, it becomes the real thing.

When a fake is first sold as real, someone commits FRAUD. Someone has committed a crime, so why would you not at least seriously consider taking the matter to the proper authorities? Discovering a fake, and then selling it anyway is as bad as buying and selling stolen property, or uttering. Imagine, for a minute, that you were passed a fake $100 bill, and later realise that it's fake. Do you take it in to the police, or do you commit a crime by attempting to pass it as real at a shop?

Also, suggesting that people commit fraud (by selling, as real, cards that they know to be fake) is incitement. I don't know if incitement is a crime in the USA, but it certainly is in the UK and New Zealand.

[Dozer]

When a fake is first sold as real, someone commits FRAUD.

... but nobody knows. That's the whole point, right? The only person who commits fraud, doing it intentionally, is the one who makes the "perfect" fake. Everybody else will never know, because they don't see it is fake. Once they realize it, they have to treat it as such -- and that can mean a number of things, depending on personal values. Turn it to the authorities, burn it, play with it but not give it away ever again, frame it and put in on a wall, sell it as a known fake, all that is an option.

The only thing they should never do is sell it as the real thing. That would be continuing the fraud, but I for one did not suggest that. We are in agreement on that point.

[Methuselahn]

Sell it to some unsuspecting bastard. Who cares?

If he figures out it's fake, be so kind as to give hime a refund. If not, there's no problem.

The beauty in this course of action is that it is that it is foolproof.  If they are mad, you 'apologize,' give them a refund, and then turn it around and sell it to the next unsuspecting bastard.

Let's face reality people. The entire world is built on the backs of fucking over other people, be it legal or otherwise.  This anti-fraud youthful idealism is quite impractical and ridiculous.  People don't play by those rules IRL.

[Godder]

Selling cards that you know are fake is as bad as selling cards you know to be stolen. The community doesn't seem to like card-thieves, so why would we encourage card-frauds instead?

[Juggernaut GO]

I would just trade it back in to stokinger the next time he runs a big tournament.  I remember at newington last year some giant fat bastard was buying cards for andy and he ripped a 14 year old kid off a mint unlimited black lotus which he got 2 beat to piss moxes for.  All the knuckledragger dealers are in it only for money and suckers keep trading cards in, so what's to stop them really?

[Cross]

I think this discussion has cost a lot of community's integrity. In all reality you shouldn't do anything other than be careful about the next piece of power you buy. Ripping someone else off is wildly immoral as is getting revenge on dealers. I understand being pissed, but this should really be a lesson in protecting yourself. I'd take the advice of selling it as a really good proxy, people on eBay are kinda crazy and will throw down good money for them.

[Cab]

I would do such once you made sure that it was a fake:

1) Take it to the guy that you bought the card from and point out to him, in a polite way, why the card is fake, whether it doesn't past the bend test, doesn't have the ring printing pattern or has some other abnormality in it that makes it distinguishable as a fake. If you do this, then you are helping out the dealer so that they don't buy any more fakes and sell them to others thus making that otherwise good dealer (I presume) basically screwed. Go to the dealer, not the lackey

2) After you have done number 1 very politely, but not overly politely or else you look very stupid, ask if it is possible for you to get a refund or some sort of exchange on any count. If need be, point out the lackey if he is at the same place as the dealer or give the dealer the lackey's name. Try to get a close to full refund, but if that is not possible, then get as much as you can either in cards or cash, whichever you can get/prefer.

3) Burn the card. Yes, I said burn it. It can be used as a nice fire starter and you will never have to pass it on to another unsuspecting victim.


For all of the people that said "sell it and be an a$$" or some variation thereof, I hope something like this happens to you so you can know the feeling of being ripped off for some fake piece of cardboard.

Whatever you do, don't sell it on ebay because then the buyer will most likely market it as a real card and then the cycle will start all over again.

[Bram]

I can understand what all of your are saying (and I'm glad that at least two people seem to agree with me...thanks guys, I was beginning to feel pretty alone) and I sympathise. Again, while all of you may hate what I said, I want to stress that I myself have never been (or never will be) in this situation because I am careful bordering on paranoid when buying expensive cards. This is the very reason I do that.

Why would I be so careful if I'm really that bastard who just goes and rips off someone else for a profit even if it turns out to be fake? Well, because I want to prevent having to do just that. It would not make me feel good, and it is most definitely the wrong course of action from an ethical viewpoint.

It's just that all of you seem to be advising him to 'break the cycle of fraud'. Why does he have to be the loser that takes the fall for someone else's mischief? Why do you guys care anyway? Is it because you're idealistic, or is it because you're disgusted that there's fake cards out there and afraid you'll end up buying one yourself one day? I think it may well be that latter.

Anyway, who among you have ever been in his situation? Who has ever bought an $ X00 card that turned out to be fake, and then just swallowed the loss? Who among your number have ever actually broken that 'cycle of fraud', losing hundreds of dollars in the process? I know for damn sure it'll be less than the number of people that gave me the 'holier-than-thou' attitude for what I said.

[Jacob Orlove]

Anyway, who among you have ever been in his situation? Who has ever bought an $ X00 card that turned out to be fake, and then just swallowed the loss? Who among your number have ever actually broken that 'cycle of fraud', losing hundreds of dollars in the process? I know for damn sure it'll be less than the number of people that gave me the 'holier-than-thou' attitude for what I said.

Not quite the same situation, but I at least am no hypocrite: http://www.themanadrain.com/forums/index.php?topic=21770.0

[Bram]

Not quite the same situation,

Indeed not. Props to you for what you did ofcourse, but I'd like to state I'd have done the same thing. A while ago, I found a Time Walk under the table at a tournament. I did not think about putting it in my binder even once before handing it over to the TO. I never even rip people for cards (the most skewed deal I ever had was his two beat Morphlings for my playset of Covetous Dragons, and he was happy about that). It's just that I think a lot of people in here are not seriously (or honestly) thinking about what they would do in that particular situation, but rather what they feel that kid should do (which is unfair, IMO).

[Jacob Orlove]

Actually, it's basically the same situation (take $300 from someone), only in one case you lost a totally unrelated $300 first.

The only reason it's different is that people are loss-averse, so they're perfectly willing to behave differently in what are fundamentally identical circumstances. Yay for fundamental irrationalities in human behavior!

[The Atog Lord]

It's just that all of you seem to be advising him to 'break the cycle of fraud'. Why does he have to be the loser that takes the fall for someone else's mischief?

Because someone has to. Because sometimes doing what is right is inconsistent with doing what is convenient. Because the alternative to absorbing the loss is to become a part of that cycle of fraud and deceit.

Why do you guys care anyway?

I care because I'm seeing a highly-regarded, influential member of the community advocating something which I find morally unacceptable. So, while arguing with a mod might be as unwise as trying to skin a lion, I respond.

[Bram]

I care because I'm seeing a highly-regarded, influential member of the community advocating something which I find morally unacceptable. So, while arguing with a mod might be as unwise as trying to skin a lion, I respond.

How unwise that is, depends on if you're bringing forty midgets or not   

Seriously, I have no beef with the advise you guys are giving. As I've stated numerous times, ofcourse it's the proper thing to do. But again I ask: how many of you would actually do it? I've known some of you for some time know, and I think that there are definitely those among you that would do the Right Thing (tm). But I'm also pretty sure that a lot of the 'pro cycle breakers' wouldn't think twice about selling the card if it was their cash on the line.

[everythingitouchdies]

Seriously, I have no beef with the advise you guys are giving. As I've stated numerous times, ofcourse it's the proper thing to do. But again I ask: how many of you would actually do it? I've known some of you for some time know, and I think that there are definitely those among you that would do the Right Thing (tm). But I'm also pretty sure that a lot of the 'pro cycle breakers' wouldn't think twice about selling the card if it was their cash on the line.

Again I am totally here with this one. I have never been burned on a purchase, and I spent a full year assembling my power to avoid having this happen. Every time I have won a piece I went into instant paranoia mode as well. But if I did get burned, I could not afford to just be out three hundred dollars for the sake of bieng the bigger person and ending a ring of tragedy. I am totally okay with this. I would not, I stress NOT, feel great about doing so, but it would not cost me sleep. There is a HUGE difference between making fakes and intentionally ripping someone off and passing your misfortune to someone else. I am no martyr and I dont play this game to test my moral compass. And I dont let my morals cost me large sums of money. Maybe it makes me less ethical, a lower person on the heirarchy of saints, but in the end it keeps me from being the guy getting screwed because he is too nice.

And I found a 4cc deck at a time when I didnt own full power that was stocked with beta stuff. I could have been set and in the circumstances no one would have known or been able to prove it. I went out of my way and actually spent a little bit of money to get the deck back to its proper owner. Its not an issue of theft or opportunity here, its an issue of not being the lowest guy on the food chain.

If anyone wants to martyr themselves and break the cycle, why dont you just buy the fake off him for what he paid for it and destroy it yourself? You would get my vote for the nicest human alive, and you would resolve the issue, and you would definitely break the cycle. No takers? I am not surprised.

EITD

[Jacob Orlove]

If anyone wants to martyr themselves and break the cycle, why dont you just buy the fake off him for what he paid for it and destroy it yourself? You would get my vote for the nicest human alive, and you would resolve the issue, and you would definitely break the cycle. No takers? I am not surprised.

I don't want to sound harsh here, but any american who can afford power can generally afford to lose $300. It's massively unpleasant, but nowhere near the end of the world. If someone is going to give away $300, there are far better charitable causes than Aaron's friend, even though he is no doubt a good person.

And if you're about to ask why I don't rip people off in order to get more money for charity, it's because it's wrong not only to defraud people, but also to try to make that kind of decision (where their money should go) for them. They could even be buying the power so that they can run a charity tournament.

[The Atog Lord]

There is a HUGE difference between making fakes and intentionally ripping someone off and passing your misfortune to someone else.

How so?

In either case, you are harming another in order to further your own personal gain. In neither case is there regard for the good of another. Do you feel that because you have been ripped off you are entitled to rip off another? Does the fact that you made a foolish purchase before justify your doing something immoral now? I just can't see any difference. Perhaps you can help show me.

[Bram]

And if you're about to ask why I don't rip people off in order to get more money for charity

You read my mind 

In either case, you are harming another in order to further your own personal gain. In neither case is there regard for the good of another. Do you feel that because you have been ripped off you are entitled to rip off another? Does the fact that you made a foolish purchase before justify your doing something immoral now? I just can't see any difference. Perhaps you can help show me.

Oh, come off it, will ya? You know perfectly well what we mean. I think me and EITD have made our positions on this sufficiently clear. You're just attempting to lure us into a discussion we've already admitted to not being able to win, because it revolves around the question if its ethically wrong or not (which it is).

I am very disappointed in the lack of realism displayed by most in this thread. I'm not a pessimistic person by nature, but I don't believe for two seconds that myself and EITD are the only two people in here that would sell the damn thing.

He's right, you know. If you all are so involved in the cummunity that you are willing to bleed financially to discontinue the cycle of fraud, then just buy it from him and shred it in front of your webcam. Go on, I dare ya! Somewhat harder to be all high-and-mighty when it's suddenly about your cash, innit? Or wait...maybe you think that it's not the same thing, because you'd be buying someone that you KNOW to be fake. Great, that's true. But that just means that you want the thread starter's friend to get stuck with the bill because he was a stupid bastard that didn't check his card before buying it, and should suffer for his stupidity in order to prevent you from ever getting ripped. Sounds a little less 'pure' to me than the way you guys explained it.

[CrazyCarl]

Selling proxies is illegal.

[Machinus]

If he used it for a year and never had problems with it, perhaps another buyer would never know that it was fake. It sounds like a special set of circumstances that let it be discovered in the first place. It also sounds like one of the best fakes ever.

Honestly, the only difference between a forged 20 and a real one is that you can go to prison for making it. The economic impact and gravity of the printing operation that WOTC runs is nowhere near that of the USD. It's just cardboard, and while we here at TMD represent a hardcore sect of the already dedicated Type 1 community, the fact is that most people don't care about cardboard as much as we do.

EDIT: Added stuff below, as an addendum and pseudo-response to any questions of "legality" that people might try to bring up.

There is no definition of what is legal or not. This is and has been an ethical discussion from the beginning, because there is nothing clear about what is legal and what is not. Forgery is clearly wrong whenever it is discussed by the law. Wizards has an interest in card forging techniques but they can't prosecute someone for forging magic cards. Selling them is different entirely, but the person who started this thread hasn't forged anything, which is why this debate exists.

Anyway, the question of what Wizards' policies are doesn't even enter into the discussion. They don't make any money off type 1, and we are more of a drain than a benefit for the corporation. People aren't going around forging arcbound ravagers (or whatever is worth $25 these days). The only cards worth forging are Vintage stuff, and WotC has very little interaction with the community. Type 1 is effectively an independent market that happens to be based on items that they manufactured a long time ago.

If it was possible to make a fake lotus that couldn't be positively identified as a fake, is it still a fake? It is stated quite often that in the 12 years that they have existed, power has experienced many different kinds of wear and erosion and there is wide variation in the look and feel of older cards. I don't think it is impossible for someone to forge cards that look so good that even dealers couldn't tell the difference. If you can buy it for the average market price, play it in tournaments, and sell it for a comparable price when you quit, that's as real as any magic card EVER GETS. Past that, it's a fantasy game built on a cardboard premise.

I haven't seen the card in question, but if I owned it, and depending on how it looked, I might just keep playing it in tournaments.

[Jacob Orlove]

Okay, here's the basic problem that you are not understanding:

Separate economic events that happen to the same person are still separate economic events.

An example:
Situation 1) you get the chance to steal $300 from an unsuspecting stranger
You have already stated that you wouldn't do something like this.

Situation 2) you lose $300
That's no fun. You'll probably complain for a while, and bring it up occasionally in future conversations. But you'll get over it.

Situation 3) you get the chance to steal $300 from an unsuspecting stranger (and obviously turn it down, like you said). Then, you lose $300.
You probably feel pretty bad about losing the money, but at least you didn't steal that $300!

Situation 4) you lose $300, then you get the chance to steal $300 from an unsuspecting stranger.
Here, you change your mind, and steal the money.

My question is, why is your answer to situation 4 (steal the money), different from your answer to situation 3 (don't steal it)?

In other words, if you're willing to do the (admittedly) wrong thing some of the time, why not all of the time? This is an honest question--I already answered the "if you're willing to do the 'right' thing some of the time, why not all of the time?" question.

edit: people, please don't fall into the empty response of "something is right because the law says so." We all know that's not always true.

[Komatteru]

Alright, I'll chime in here with some words of wisdom concerning what is real and what is not real.  I apologize if this is hard to read or the grammar and syntax seem primitive.  I'm trying to put a pretty abstract concept into words without getting into too much technical details.

My father and I have been collecting sports memorabilia since 1995.  When we first started, the market was small and there really wasn't real a lot of time and effort put into the certification of items.  Each item we got we stood in line to have signed ourselves, so we always knew that everything in our collection is real.  After a couple years, we started photographing each item as it was signed, and tried to pick up certificates of authenticity when they were available (many shows charged for them, and it just didn't seem worth it to us for our personal collection).  After 5 years or so, "certification" became the biggest thing.  On site, you could have a company inspect the item, give it a registered number and little hologram sticker, and it would enter their database.  If you sold the item later, you or the buyer could contact the company and they would guarantee its legitimacy.  However, as you can imagine, this system is far from perfect.  What happens if/when the company goes out of business?  Does that little number hidden on the back of the item still mean anything?  What about the photographs, are those a guarantee of legitimacy?

Ultimately, there is no way to guarantee the legitimacy of any item in the memorabilia world.  For all intensive purposes, an item is real if enough people believe that it is.  There is a chink in the certification process: although the company was on sight, they did not witness the item being autographed personally.  That is, there wasn't a person who witnessed the signature and walked with you to the table where they did the actual numbering and entering of the item into the database.  The people doing the actual certification also didn't really do the most fantastic job of inspecting it.  More or less, they assumed you got it signed 100 feet away like everyone else.  Thus, if you had a pretty reasonable fake, it wasn't hard to get it certified.  Does that make the item "real"?  To most people, it would.  My father and I know that every single item we own is real, since we were there for all of them.  For us, that's good enough.  However, if we were to sell the items (some of them are worth a considerable amount at that), it might be necessary for us to have them all certified by a publicly recognized company.  We have often wondered what would happen if we were to do that.  With all the stuff we have (a thousand pieces or so), it seems likely that a company might judge at least one of them to be fake.  However, we know that's not the case, but, then, who will believe us?  We have a picture of the item being signed, but even that isn't good enough.  Football and baseballs all look alike, and there's no way to tell that the one in the picture is the one I'm holding in my hand here.  All that a picture proves is that an item was signed in my presence.  That item could belong to the guy behind me in line (I could have just waited there).  The buyer ultimately has to take my word for it that the item he is purchasing is legitimate.

And still, what of the certification process?  Certainly, there are companies that do more robust checking methods, such as comparison to other signatures, etc.  Guess what?  Signatures are written by people, and that induces a lot of variance.  I know that I don't always sign my name exactly the same.  Sometimes, my hand cramps up and my signature looks very different from how it usually does.  Sometimes I have trouble with a specific pen, or maybe the pen I used is lower on ink, etc.  All of this induces variance.  Not every signature is the same.  It is not impossible that if my father and I were to send an item off for certification that it would be judged as a fake.  Perhaps we were at the end of the line for this signature and the star's hand was pretty tired, or the pen he used was bad.  We are both 100% certain that said item is real, but that doesn't matter one bit to the certification company.  Their little "foolproof" process decided our item was a fake.  And guess what?  It is possible that they might judge a fake item to be real.

So how does all this relate to Magic cards and fake power?  Despite being produced by an industrial machine, not every card is 100% identical.  There are variances in printing: ink is not always uniform, sometimes the cutting process is off, etc.  Everyone has seen cards that have been inked twice, not gotten enough ink, etc.  There is no way to prove that any given card is real.  How would one know whether sometime is real?  That would require something like this: Person A witnesses the printing, tells person B about it.  Person B witnesses the card going into a pack.  Person C learns of this from A and B and watches the pack leave the warehouse in a truck driven by person D.  Person D stays with the cards in the truck at all times, and is 100% certain that no one has broken into the truck and added or removed anything.  Then we go through distributors.  Lord knows how many people there are between that and the consumer.  Ultimately, it takes one hell of a lot of people to verify the authenticity of a card.  Any break in that chain opens up the door for some doubt.  Thus, it is completely impossible to know whether something is real or not just by looking at it.  Sure, you can identify key features and such on the card to increase your certainty that the card is real, but you can never be 100% certain about it.  A card that you think is fake could be the result of some weird printing variance that only happened once or twice.  It is possible that the same flaw you noticed in a Mox Sapphire occured on the entire sheet--but no one is checking Mon's Goblin Raiders to see if it's real, or displays any of the same variances that Sapphire does.

So, what you have here, is a card that you had two people (both of whom have expertise in industrial printing and graphic design) who judged the card to be fake by inspecting it with their eyes.  No microscopes, no chemical analysis, etc.  All you have here is two people who suspect the card to be fake.  You cannot be 100% certain that they are correct.  Likely, the only way to tell the true legitimacy of the card is to destroy it with some high tech chemical analysis.  It sure doesn't do you much good then, does it?  Is it possible that your card is fake? Yes.  Is it possible that your card is real? Yes.  Ultimately, you cannot ever know.

Here's my bottom line: the card is real if enough people think that it's real.  We are dealing with cardboard here.  As much as we say that this is collectible game, all that matters is the play value.  Cards that don't see play aren't worth anything.  We're all pretty sure that once the game dies, the cards aren't going to be worth the cardboard they're printed on.  If this card is playable and undetectible to most people, then it's real for our purposes.  This is not the sports memorabilia world; we ultimately prize cards that we can play with, despite how much we say that we prize them for their collectibilty.  If I couldn't play with my Asian foils, I wouldn't want any part of them, no matter how rare or valuable they may be.  Can you play with this card?  Most likely yes.  Should you have a guilty conscience about it?  I don't think so.  You purchased the card in good faith; to you, it was real then.  However, somehow you let a couple people convince you that that's not the case.  Is selling the card to someone else morally wrong?  Maybe, maybe not.  Everyone is making a big deal about continuing the fraud, etc., but no one can be certain if the card is real or not.  Do what you want with it.  For all intensive purposes, if the card can be played (and trust me, unless it's obvious, no one's going to call you or anyone else on it), then it's real.  It serves its purpose.  That's what makes it worth anything at all.

[Saucemaster]

He's right, you know. If you all are so involved in the cummunity that you are willing to bleed financially to discontinue the cycle of fraud, then just buy it from him and shred it in front of your webcam. Go on, I dare ya! Somewhat harder to be all high-and-mighty when it's suddenly about your cash, innit? Or wait...maybe you think that it's not the same thing, because you'd be buying someone that you KNOW to be fake. Great, that's true. But that just means that you want the thread starter's friend to get stuck with the bill because he was a stupid bastard that didn't check his card before buying it, and should suffer for his stupidity in order to prevent you from ever getting ripped. Sounds a little less 'pure' to me than the way you guys explained it.

I really don't want to get involved in the argument here too much, but as an interested observer, I'd be interested in an elaboration here.  I don't see how this point logically follows at all.  You seem to be somehow arguing that Person B's acknowledgement that Person A should be willing to suffer financial harm by virtue of a misfortune that befalls Person A somehow entails that Person B should acknowledge that he should also be willing to suffer financial harm on the behalf of Person A when Person A suffers that misfortune.  I don't see how that follows.  And it has nothing to do with him "suffering for his stupidity"--it could be something as simple as saying that everyone is responsible for their own moral response to whatever befalls them, fortunate or unfortunate.

Am I misreading this point?

EDIT: Holy crap, can you tell I studied Philosophy?  Let me rephrase the above:

Given: Bob suffers a misfortune.  Jim says that Bob has a responsibility to respond to this unfortunate occurence in a moral way, even if it means he'll be financially harmed.  It obviously follows that, should this misfortune happen to Jim at some point, Jim should also be willing to suffer financial harm.  What does NOT follow is that Jim should be willing to suffer financial harm when the situation occurs to Bob. 

[Bram]

Situation 4) you lose $300, then you get the chance to steal $300 from an unsuspecting stranger.
Here, you change your mind, and steal the money.

I don't see it that way. I wouldn't be stealing anyone's money. I'd be selling them a card that may be fake (based on someone else's opinion). The only moral issue here is that I would not state in my description of the item that I suspect it may be fake. I didn't fake it, and there's no conclusive evidence that it even is a fake. If the buyer is happy to shell out $300 bucks for a piece of cardboard, I'm happy to oblige. Because if: a. he discovers (or comes to believe) it is a fake on his own, I will happily apologise and refund him, and if b. he doesn't, then there's really no problem (he'd be in the situation I was before someone told me they thought it was fake). This, to me, is not stealing. It is fraud at best, and I'm pretty damn sure you can't even prove that. I mean, people are buying and selling $300 cards all over the net. How the hell is anyone gonna prove I attempted fraud when I wasn't even certain it was fake myself?

In other words, if you're willing to do the (admittedly) wrong thing some of the time, why not all of the time?

This is a valid question. It is also a very fundamental question. It has to do with your personal belief system. OK, time for an analogy. Over there in the US, it's apparently legal to kill/harm someone who breaks in to your house. Over here, it is not. That will not, however, stop me from taking the bat I have hidden under my bed to the head of a burglar. I'll be prosecuted for this, and if I did any serious harm, likely go to jail. But I'd still do it. I mean, god knows what he was gonna do. AFAIK, he wanted to kill me or someone I loved. I'd have done something that was legally and morally (according to the norms of the country I live in) wrong. But I sure as hell wouldn't go around whacking random people over the head in the streets. Why not? I dunno, really. For one thing, I don't like to do things that I know to be wrong. I just do them what I have to. So it boils down to what I believe I have to do. This is all very situational, as well as related to personality.

I don't see how that follows.  And it has nothing to do with him "suffering for his stupidity"--it could be something as simple as saying that everyone is responsible for their own moral response to whatever befalls them, fortunate or unfortunate.

It doesn't follow, really. I just like how EITD sort of turned the table around with that idea. It takes it to the next level. Because, as I'm sure you'll agree, it's kind of REALLY easy for your hypothetical person B to lecture person A on how he should behave when it is not person B's paycheck on the line. That fact that person B's prime argument seems to be the wellbeing of a community that he himself is also a part of (person B stands to gain from persuading person A into doing the right thing and taking the fall) makes ot all the more interesting (and makes me question person B's motives). So I thought it would be nice to see how far person B would be willing to go to 'protect his valuable community.' I mean, in his own words, shredding the card would be beneficial to him (the two events are interrelated because the 'breaking of the fraud' circle affects both people). Is his community so valuable to him that he would pay $300 to help save it? If not (which would be the logical course of action), it's kind of hypocritical for him to expect person A to do so.

[EDIT] Jim, Bob, whatever ;-) Also: I'm done with this discussion. Don't get me wrong; I'm not pissed off. It's just that I blieve I have conveyed my point to the best of my ability. I understand all your arguments, and I believe that if you reread my posts, you'll understand mine. What's left is a difference of opinion and interpretation. No amount of posting will sway any of us one way or the other, and I think we've all gained some insights, so let's just quit while we're ahead. I know I will. It's been interesting. Thank you. See yall at the next ethical discussion ;-)

[Jacob Orlove]

upon close examination, it is quite definately a fake. A good fake, yes, but a fake none-the-less.

I'm operating under the assumption that the above is true. Also, some people have confused this with a situation where two people told his friend that the card was fake. Wrong. Check out what he actually said:

we were able to tell was using different strength and band lights to see that it was, indeed, not the same ink ... The more we look at it now, the easier it is for us to find slight printing faults that give away it's invalidity. In fact, my girlfriend AND her sister, both trained in the arts of graphic design and layout, looked at it in comparison to my real power and pointed to 3 tells where a high quality scan had not been correctly printed (they said it was common for homebrew printing press setups).

If there was any actual doubt, then that would be a different situation, but there is none. It may not be possible to prove that a card is real, but it IS possible to prove that a card is fake. Don't confuse the two--what we are dealing with here (according to Aaron) is a 100% completely fake imitation of a magical card.

Oh, and fraud, by definition, is theft.

edit: I can't speak for other people, but I'm not arguing that he should take action for the benefit of the community. Moral decisions, like this one, are not about gains and losses. I'm asking (and I know this is idealistic at best) for altruism--doing the right thing, at a personal cost, simply because it is the right thing to do.

[Komatteru]

If there was any actual doubt, then that would be a different situation, but there is none. It may not be possible to prove that a card is real, but it IS possible to prove that a card is fake. Don't confuse the two--what we are dealing with here (according to Aaron) is a 100% completely fake imitation of a magical card.

However, Jacob, there is one problem: if you cannot prove that something is real, you cannot prove that something is fake.  To determine a fake, you need to have an authentic copy to validate against.  If I made a statement like "all functions are green" but gave no definition for green, how would you know that I'm correct or not?  If I showed you a bunch of functions and told you "some are green, and some are not," how in the world would you ever figure out which ones are which?  If I showed you a hundred of these things and told you that "green" is a rare quality, then you would likely not find that many green functions.  Could you be certain? No, but if you were an expert, you might come pretty close, but there could still be errors in your reasoning.

[Jacob Orlove]

So you can't prove that my VS card with "Black Lotus" written on it is not, in fact, an actual Black Lotus magic card? What about my rebacked CE that's twice as thick as a real card? While I will agree that it may be impossible to be absolutely certain that a card is real, we can all agree that certain cards are fake. There are certain properties that we know the real cards must posses, and we can use these to prove cards that don't measure up to be fake.

Edit: this is very different from the memorabilia situation in that respect, because we know some of the basic facts about the cards that came out of the factory--there is just not a huge room for variation, particularly in stuff like what kind of ink they used.

An apt analogy is scientific theories--it's very easy to disprove obviously false theories (things fall up! false, because they don't), and possible to disprove less obviously false ones (eg incorrect theories of atomic structure), but there is no way to actually prove that any theory is 100% guaranteed true (because all we know is that it is completely consistent with observed evidence).

[Bram]

OK, one last post since Jacob replied while I was typing.

Oh, and fraud, by definition, is theft.

Not over here, it isn't.

Een handeling waarbij men gebruik maakt van valse voorwendselen, in combinatie met het al dan niet ge-(mis)bruik maken van hulpmiddelen en of apparatuur, met het doelmerk om zich op basis van deze bedrieglijke gegevens ten koste van anderen te bevoordelen i.e. te verrijken.

"(Fraud is) an action in which one uses false pretences, possibly in combination with the (ab)use of equipment, with the goal of benefiting or enriching oneself at the cost of (an)other(s) through this deception."

Fraud, over here, is not a legal term and as such the above definition is indicative. Fraud does not appear in any of our criminal law texts. Judicially, fraud is usually described as a combination of actions like forgery of documents, swindling or theft. Fraud does not imply theft. It may include theft, but according to our definition, this is simply not the case here. The official definition for theft (Criminal Law, article 310) is:

enig goed dat geheel of gedeeltelijk aan een ander toebehoort wegnemen met het oogmerk het zich wederrechtelijk toe te eigenen.

"Taking a good that wholly or partially belongs to another with the goal of illegaly aquiring it."

This is not the case in our example. I'm not illegally aquiring anything. I'm selling an item thourgh a legal channel for a price both parties agreed on.

Deception? If I know conclusively it's fake and don't tell him: yes, probably (though this could never be proven).
Swindling? Maybe.
Forgery? Not by the seller of the card, anyway.
Fraud? Yes.
Theft? No.

[kl0wn]

Regarding the authenticity of the card, did it pass the bend test? Is the thickness identical to a "real" card?

If so, then regardless of the printing quality on the card, it is considered to be real. That's the only thing you need to consider when trying to determine whether a Magic card is real or not, since it is the only thing that will come into question when playing it in a tournament. There have been so many different variations in the printing quality of cards over the years that basing an older card's authenticity on it's print quality is just about the most irrelevent and nitpicky thing that a person can do.

If it passes the bend test and is identical to a "real" card in thickness and stock and you STILL think it's fake, I'll buy the damned thing from you (or your friend) myself for a very discounted amount and play with it. After all, it's not a real card, right? Therefore it's worthless, right? And you shouldn't sell it to someone who will try to pass it off as real, right? Therefore, I will offer to buy it for $100 for personal use only. Of course, I'd have to inspect it myself first.

My point is that if it feels real, then it's real. If it feels real but looks funny, then it's a real card that's either misprinted or has poor print quality. Keep in mind though, that my concept of "feels real" is VERY stringent and difficult to detect by mortal hands, so you might want to get the opinion of someone who thinks that cards made after Revised smell funny to make sure.

Regarding this moral dilemma:

People always ask me: "Tony, how can you take all this money from stupid, innocent, naive people and still look at yourself in the mirror?"

To which I reply: "Isn't it worth it to take all that money if I can just make one person happy? Even if that one person is me?"

-R.I.P. The Ben Stiller Show

If someone's dumb enough to not thoroughly test (ie: bend test) something worth that much money, then they deserve to get ripped. Kinda like buying a $2,000 cubic zirconia engagement ring from a pawn shop or a guy named Leroy (note: the bend test does not work with diamonds). Sorry chief, but that's what you get for being dumb.

Yes, I would say the exact same thing to myself if this happened to me. There's no double-standard here. If I spent $300 for a card and that card never left the toploader throughout the entire transaction and I later determined it to be fake, I would sit myself down and say to myself: "Self, you're a jackass." Then I would keep the fake card around as a reminder of mine own carelessness for all eternity. Until someone offered to buy it.

But firstly, I'd of course return to the person who sold it to me and request my money back and that they destroy the card or otherwise mark it as fake with a sharpie in front of me. If they didn't, I would kindly notify them that I would be letting the authorities know that it's likely they're counterfieting cards (hey, that's where you got the card, and as dealers they should be able to spot fakes, therefore it's only logical that we assume the forgery originated from them - make sure to let them know this). You'd be surprised what people will do when faced with a potential minimum six-digit lawsuit that's backed up by hard evidence.

"(Fraud is) an action in which one uses false pretences, possibly in combination with the (ab)use of equipment, with the goal of benefiting or enriching oneself at the cost of (an)other(s) through this deception."

Fraud, over here, is not a legal term and as such the above definition is indicative. Fraud does not appear in any of our criminal law texts. Judicially, fraud is usually described as a combination of actions like forgery of documents, swindling or theft. Fraud does not imply theft. It may include theft, but according to our definition, this is simply not the case here.

Problem solved. Sell it to the Dutch.

[Tha Gunslinga]

I actually had this situation happen to me, as documented here. 

Let's say that I had bought the card at a tourney, off a random idiot, and hadn't noticed it was fake until it was much too late.  Let's say the tourney was in another state, and I could never ever track the guy down.  What would I do with the card?  I'd probably loan it to a friend to use as a proxy, or destroy it.  What I would NOT do is pass it along, either as a fake or a real card, to anyone other than a close personal friend or relative.  I certainly wouldn't screw someone over by passing it off as real, and anyone who would is either a total shithead or extremely poor.  If you're that poor, you have an excuse, but you shouldn't be playing Type 1 in the first place.