Terms & Abbreviations
A– Authorizing agency
D– = Distributor
G.A.R.C Great American Ring Club
G.I.D.- Glow in the dark photosensitive
H = Hakes
HBP= Hanna Barbera Prod.
JD = Jimmy Dempsey
M– = Manufacturer
MCG Marvel Comics Group
MG = Michael George
ND = No documentation
OS = Robert Overstreet
PPI= Plastic Process Inc
RLM= Richard Lee Morris
T = Tom Tumbusch
TRJ = Toy Ring Journal
WDP= Walt Disney Prod.
WLP= Walter Lantz Prod
Alleged= statement or written opinion without documentation or other proof
UFS= United Feature Syndicate
Unlicensed = non authorized ring
Repro – Reproduction Creation of a duplicate of a previously existent ring.
This may be unlicensed (common) or licensed (seldom). It is usually produced to be confused for the original. This is not legal and collectors need to be aware of this fraudulent activity when purchasing a ring. Please look for trademarks on the ring band or face, as well as weld marks from the dyes. Material used should be reviewed but unfortunately some of these repro creators have access to original company stock. If the ring is similar but not the same in configuration or material it will not be considered a reproduction
Novelty – a ring designed for uniqueness or appeal.
These classically apply to the majority of catalogue rings of the past. They are usually non character related and as such licensing is not generally an issue. They are marketed to appeal to an older clientele. Example topics are animals (i.e. black cats, elephants, horses, lions, monkeys, owls, dogs etc.), comic mottos, military, Indian, Egyptian (hieroglyphics, Sphynx, pharaoh), Western, cowboy. and the list goes on and on.
Fantasy – A term used in Overstreet’s guide indicating a ring “not licensed for creation and was made without permission from the owners of the property.”
This is creation of a de novo ring with no prior antecedent ring having existed. It is unauthorized and unlicensed. The guide then offers 2 examples of the Shazam lightning bolt and green hornet rings. Care should be taken to limit the scope of fantasy to dealing only with licensed rings which are usually character related. Although I do not necessarily dispute the possibility these examples are fantasy it is not entirely clear they were not produced as a generic ring and others have associated them with the aforementioned characters. This issue carries onto many other rings.
These are created to attract and pique the imagination. In previous guides they are touted a being lesser rings and relegated to a low price. In my opinion this is not supported by the ring market sales and history. In fact, large numbers of “fantasy rings” have sold in the past and are being offered. Previously, novelty rings were sold by catalogues and vendors which were not licensed. These rings were mostly non character related and could be generic animals, western, horses, horse shoes, good luck, lucky rings, aliens etc. They require no authorization to be created. In this case the criterion of licensed is not met and the term of fantasy may not be fitting and no comment regarding the issue of fantasy will be rendered. Some rings also appear in previous guides both recognized and not recognized as fantasy. There are several ring attributions to characters which have no documentation for that title and there is data which demonstrates those rings created with other generic names. The fantasy term would be best dealing primarily with character related rings. Rings produced in this character unlicensed situation are technically not following copyright law. None the less there are sales of these rings from foreign entities usually online. Because of this, they will be included in the data base. This is not an endorsement of the practice but to allow viewing these rings for understanding what they are. Keep in mind without adequate data there may be suspicion they are fantasy but no way to confirm this. These rings may be well designed and crafted, but still remain unlicensed and will be designated as such when possible.