Comments on: Trek Memorabilia Collector Suing CBS & Christies

By: John1286

John1286 — Mon, 18 May 2009 00:03:21 +0000

Very nice site! cheap cialis http://opxyiea.com/yoyrqso/4.html

By: Victor Hugo

Victor Hugo — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:27:41 +0000

I totally agree with16. FlyingTigress -

Besides, isn´t it odd enough that Paramount is just “getting rid of the junk”?
Couldn´t they treat it with a little respect. Like Indiana Jones would say, all these props BELONG TO A MUSEUM, where everyone can see it.

By: Diabolik

Diabolik — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:53:48 +0000

I wonder, if i were to go through McDonald’s, and spill hot coffee on my lap, could I sue for damages? Nah, no jury would be so stupid as to award that….

By: The Vulcanista

The Vulcanista — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:18:16 +0000

#78: “If I were to buy goods from a regular store, and when I got them home they were not as described, should I be entitled to sue for $7 milllion?”
****************************

Sure; you’re entitled to sue for whatever you think a jury will award, and why not? There’s probably some jury somewhere in the U.S., in combination with your really slick atty [Denny Crane!], that would be stupid enough to award you the $7M.

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:53:09 +0000

Summary

Spiner himself says he sold the real prop on ebay before the Christies auction
Christies claim they sold the ‘real prop’ in the Star Trek auction
Christies say the case is without merit
The Christies ‘real prop’ does not fit Spiner
Spiner says he told Christies they did not have the prop he wore on the show (as he sold it on ebay)

Is this not a case of misrepresentation on the part of Christies (either accidental or deliberate)?
Has ‘Ted Moustakis of New Jersey’ tried to return the goods for a refund?
Is that not ALL he is entitled to?

If I were to buy goods from a regular store, and when I got them home they were not as described, should I be entitled to sue for $7 milllion?

By: steve adams

steve adams — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 04:50:48 +0000

Yea Ron Jon, your right it could envolve Spiner to take the stand.
^
He can’t go back now, but I don’t think he’s lying.
They obviously had 2 or 3 of these 1,99 poker visors lying around.
^
That’s the grey area in this case.

By: Jabob Slatter

Jabob Slatter — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 09:44:25 +0000

#70 – I’ll throw a phone at your head, but I’m not super rich, so your settlement might be smaller than expected…

By: Jabob Slatter

Jabob Slatter — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 09:41:16 +0000

Oh, who the hell’s gonna know the difference? Ask for a refund at the most, but don’t sue for seven million when all you spent was twelve thousand bucks! What a douche bag. Somebody please set the guy on fire for me.

By: Ron Jon

Ron Jon — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:06:36 +0000

All this assumes that Brent is correct and that there weren’t more than one visor. For all we know, Brent could be mistaken, or he could be trying to keep someone from questioning the authenticity of the visor that HE sold.

By: Anthony Pascale

Anthony Pascale — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:57:30 +0000

collecting is not my thing, but I do find it amusing that some mock those who do collect. People who visit and comment on a Star Trek site mocking those who collect Trek memorabilia is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.