This explains why there's a space between the 3 and the 6 in the (wrong) catalog nr. F 153 6. Somebody, thinking this was a matrix nr., tried to photoshop a 6 in so it would look different from the A side. Instead, this person should have changed the actual matrix nr. left to the spindle hole.
I think this is a case of someone wanting to illustrate both sides of this much-beloved record without actually owning it. A picture of the A side label was available on the blog fixbutte links to, and so that became the model for the photoshopped B side. Should we simply delete the B picture? In any case I've marked it, "FAKE, photoshopped label!!!"
Not only plausible but undoubtedly correct given that you found the source of the label used as the basis for the forged F1536. I was already largely convinced when you brought up the identical scratch at the 7 and 8 o'clock position, but it was sealed for certain when I checked the blog. Whoever did this also neglected to change the vocal credit from F1539 (Leon Whitehead) to the uncredited vocal referenced on the blog site for "Fatso."
The real question in my mind is, Why would someone do this? This is as bad as hacking someone's files and destroying their data just because you can. Some people use photo shop to clean up label photos, but this is nothing like that, which at least strives to reflect reality in the end. Did they actually print the forged label and affix it to a copy of the disc?
slholzer has already noted some incoherencies in the uploaded images (same matrix numbers, different catalog numbers). In fact, I assume that the B-side image is a fake, produced from the A-side label (which is shown on a blog) by someone who couldn't tell matrix and catalog numbers (not necessarily the submitter here). Both labels are apparently the same, with a scratch between the 7 and 8 o'clock position and everything identical except the title "Fatso" (with a slightly different typeface) and the "9" of the cat# turned over to become a "6".
This disc has previously been identified in discog listings (Blues Research 1, for instance) as F 1539 and was also so identified on this website before photos were added. Oddly, both sides of this disc are not labeled as F 1539. The B side is labeled F 1536, although it has the expected titles from BR 1 and the previous 45 worlds website listing. Also, although both cited sources had the mxs as 1655 and 1656, both labels show the mx as 1655. According to Blues Research 1, there is an F 1536 disc by Goree Carter with two entirely different titles. This is not just a regulation F 1539 disc with a label from another disc accidentally attached. Do these labels represent the only version of F 1539 extant, or is there a "corrected" version as well?