Card Identification Forum

Not necessarily. Panini baseball cards aren't licensed, and they're listed on here. Here's the thing about this card:

1) we need a full checklist to add it. I've seen no one offer one up or even offer to go find one. It's probably a one card set but that can't be assumed.

2) no one said that it can't be listed. Every member who spoke out against listing it gave their personal opinion of why they feel like it shouldn't be (and I agree with them personally). There was no ruling, no determination, and no hard-and-fast "no" answer said anywhere in this thread, that I remember. 

3) the point about why it shouldn't be listed (and why I feel that it shouldn't be) is the fact that it's a blatant rip off of another design. That's the equivalent of taking a home made card from eBay and calling it legitimate. To me, it isn't ethical and we shouldn't be enabling nor acknowledging those who practice this with any sort of recognition. Again, personal opinion.

4) C2Cigars sets are perfectly acceptable to be listed here. Why? They're trading cards. Chuck produces them with original designs, asking permission from his subjects, and a full and complete checklist is able to be compiled. Just because they're released in a more limited quantity than a Walking Dead non-sport set doesn't mean they're any less qualified to be here.

My personal feelings about this hobby are the reason that I feel this card shouldn't be listed here, along with some other cards that fit this description as well (homemade rip offs) that probably already are. If it meets site guidelines, however, my personal feelings don't really matter, do they?

Sorry if my opinion in this thread has caused people to think that I was stating site rules (I acknowledge that my posts usually do). I was merely stating an opinion that does not preclude this card from being listed - and as Jason stated, provided we have the full checklist.

As a former 7-year employee of a card company that produced original products, seeing blatant copyright infringements simply annoy me to no end.

Well, seems likes alls good with the replying members. The CL shouldn't be an issue either as we have a "slew" of 1 card CLs throughout the site.

So, this issue has been decided. Michael CWS, here we come!

https://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewSet.cfm/sid/204048/1993-Amer-Sports-Michael-Jordan

I did add this set, and the information I found was that it is 1993, not sure if that is accurate though.

Forgive me if I’m being overly pedantic but Panini baseball cards are licensed. It’s just that they are only licensed by the Players Association and not MLB. Which is why they can have a players name and likeness but no team names or logos. 

Fair point, and you're correct. I suppose I was looking for an example that many would recognize, because the first thing I think of when I hear "unlicensed baseball cards" is the modern Panini releases. I'll have to use better examples in the future 

Sorry, but I don't think this is the Jordan, CWS, card that is pictured. Or am I missing something?

https://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewSet.cfm/sid/204048/1993-Amer-Sports-Michael-Jordan

I did add this set, and the information I found was that it is 1993, not sure if that is accurate though.

My info has the card as 1991 / NNO / unlicensed card.

Alrighty, This Jordan Card is from a group of cards featuring Jordan. It was distributed by AAMER or Aamer. In researching, I found plenty of Aamer cards listed here, anywhere from 1 to multi card CLs. So, all I need is to find a CL that lists all the cards. BTW, the other cards that were produced in the '90s were Bo Jackson cards, probably more, probably Griffey as well.