Apple 1 on eBay - shameless self promotion

[Scott Stevens]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 15:09:56 +0100
"Hans Franke" <Hans.Franke at siemens.com> wrote:

> Am 17 Dec 2005 19:40 meinte Bryan K. Blackburn:
> 
> > I interrupt this list with a short commercial message...
> 
> > I just listed a working Apple 1 Computer on eBay, item
> > #8739750233 at:
> > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8739750233
> 
> > This is a faithful recreation, nearly an exact replica, not an
> > original.  Really cool, just the same.
> 
> Well, neat. Cool! And congratulation to your great work.
> 
> >From a colectors viwpoint I'm quite concerned because of the
> >good
> work. While Vince' Replika-1 has all the fun but different
> looks, yours may be directly taken as the real thing. The only
> difference I spotet beside chip dates and capacitors (which
> could be because it's an refurbished one), is the missing
> copyright line below 'Apple Computer 1'.
> 
> I fear that in a very short time your boards (I assume you made
> more than one) will show up anounced as the real thing. With a
> little effort the missing line can be added - but even without,
> it's so close, that most non experts (and most self proclaimed)
> will take it as genuine Apple 1. Beside all the hassles for
> people that might pay 1+ grand for it while beliveing to make a
> bargain, just to realize at some point that they got framed.
> 
> This might cause real damage to our hobby. But beside that
> people unknowingly selling one (hafter having bought one from a
> guy not been told that it's a Replica) follow the trail to you
> and add your name in a civil case, in a lot of countries this
> might be egliable for a criminal case. With a look at the board
> and your advertisement (eBay) it might be hard for any lawyer to
> argue that you realy did go all the length to make shure that
> everybody understands that it is a copy, and not an Apple 1 from
> Apple Computer.

I don't see how this would damage our hobby.  Or how it would
damage mine, anyway.  I don't collect things and value them
because of their scarcity.  I collect things because they are cool
and interesting to maintain and run, or just to have.  The
historical value of an Apple I system will remain, and it will
always be easy to tell a replica from the real thing, unless
ridiculous expense is taken in producing the replica.  Identifying
guides will be developed, and people will study and explore even
MORE of the things that make the original unique.

A real Apple I at this point in time comes with a provenance, i.e.
a history that usually can be traced, like a work by Rembrandt. 
Apple I systems don't 'come out of the woodwork' and people who
think they will are gullible.  I used to be a coin collector, and
still 'dabble' in it somewhat, but left the hobby in part because
it's become the domain of speculators and people who look at
'value' and 'scarcity' first.  Some of my favorite coins, and some
of my favorite classic computer hardware, is stuff that is
specifically 'flawed' in a way that an appraiser would devalue it
for.  But those 'flaws' often add historical interest.  The only
merit that I personally see in a world where people value 'rare
and scarce' classic computing hardware is that people are less
likely to just trash it without thinking twice.



> 
> Recent efforts to crack down on product pirates (stron support
> from the US) added laws, in some countries, where the prosecutor
> does not need any complain by the trademark/copyright holder
> to go after a suspect.
> 

(I typed a big bunch of stuff about my disdain for 'trademarks for
the sake of trademarks' as a swindle operation by marketers, but
have omitted it as offtopic before posting this message)