Saturday, February 16, 2013 Hasn't Erased Pete Rose, Just Yet...

The recent rumblings in the hobby world are some how surprised that Pete Rose's name isn't listed on a Topps card.  Need we remember that a record is merely a number.  The MLB hits record is 4,256.  No where in the law of baseball cards does a card company have to state whom the record holder is.  Yes Pete Rose holds that record, but what people don't realize is that Pete Rose is a trademarked/copyrighted name, just like a business.  We in the blogging/news world can speculate why Pete Rose's name isn't listed after the record of 4,256 hits, but I can assume it is more business than spite.  In 2010 Upper Deck tried to work around the loss of the MLB contract, and ended up losing out just after 2010 Upper Deck Series 1 was put on the market.  If Leaf owns the rights to the Pete Rose name, Topps could easily find itself in legal battles with Leaf.  I'm pretty sure Leaf is waiting for the day that Topps slips and places his name on a card.  Yes, Rose hasn't had an MLB released card since 1989 mostly because his banishment from baseball.

To read news site after site saying that "Topps" just erased Pete Rose from the record books is a waste of breath.  Pete Rose is looking for anyway to get back at the MLB, he has even recently done reality TV, and the past few years has issued Leaf Pete Rose blaster boxes to be sold right next to the MLB Topps products.  Pete Rose can brand his name, but he can't brand his record number.  If Barry Bonds suddenly has a falling out with MLB and or Topps, I'm sure he would pull his name from future card products, but his home run record number would still stand.

With everyone stating that Topps would never mention Pete Rose again, still has items they sell in their store, such as Pete Rose photos.  If Topps was truly erasing Pete Rose, they would burn everything they had of Pete Rose, even his vintage items.  Even though Topps took the photo below in 1968, they are selling the item in 2013 using Pete Rose's name and likeness.  Couldn't Rose state that Topps is now using his name to get a premium for this photo?  The photo they have of Pete Rose is one of the highest priced photos on their site.  Is Topps still using his fame, name, and popularity to make some profit in 2013 from his vintage items?  If I were Leaf, and Pete Rose I wouldn't be shocked to ever see them tell Topps to stop selling these items.  I'm sure at the time of their contract in the 1960s, Pete Rose signed that Topps owns the photos and can use them for future card products.  I don't try to understand the legality of these issues, but I think these news people stating Topps scrubbing Rose from the record books are a waste of everyone's time.

No comments:

Post a Comment

No negative comments please, this blog is for fun and not intended as a business...just a collector giving some views.