The Hobby Protection Act of 1973

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

This risk of confusion is no longer hypothetical. Mike Fahey (senior authenticator ANACS) wrote a counterfeit detection column for the September 12, 2016 issue of Coin World in which he is clear that he has received "a number of emails and phone calls from confused numismatists" concerning the fantasy overstrike pieces produced by Carr in the last year.

 

Nowhere in that article did it state that the person with the "1922-D" fantasy-date over-strike half dollar paid anything more than "issue" price for it.

 

Have you inquired to find out? Do you even care? What if someone has been defrauded by someone using one of your wares?

 

That is one of the I can't find the questions example questions, which Mr. Carr thank goodness eventually found and partially answered...., so I guess they were logical and in a format he could identify..... at least to the extent that he felt was sufficient to answer with a level of avoidance that does not appear illogical or conflicting with his previous positions. The problem is the partial answers did just that.. the rest of the questions will not be answered, I assume, but that is neither good or bad, it just is.

 

The point being, we have now gone beyond the realm of new info or review of case law or hypos, or repetition of the same points. It is now bordering on the absurd and is starting to appear like keyboard wars that produce nothing but disaster.

 

I am of the opinion that Mr. Carr is aware of the concerns and that government is aware. I am also of the opinion that Mr. Carr has been alerted in some manner to the interest of the government by the government. I am also of the opinion that Mr. Carr has been assembling a working paper based on the 3 main threads on this subject. I am also of the opinion that he has attorney availability, but Mr. Carr is Mr. Carr.

 

What will be will be. This same scenario was played out with Boggs. My opinion is the same will happen in this situation. Buy them while you can.........

[dcarr]

This risk of confusion is no longer hypothetical. Mike Fahey (senior authenticator ANACS) wrote a counterfeit detection column for the September 12, 2016 issue of Coin World in which he is clear that he has received "a number of emails and phone calls from confused numismatists" concerning the fantasy overstrike pieces produced by Carr in the last year.

 

Nowhere in that article did it state that the person with the "1922-D" fantasy-date over-strike half dollar paid anything more than "issue" price for it.

 

Have you inquired to find out? Do you even care? What if someone has been defrauded by someone using one of your wares?

 

I have received no such reports. I will inquire.

 

The person perpetrating a fraud is the one who would be responsible for it, of course.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

This risk of confusion is no longer hypothetical. Mike Fahey (senior authenticator ANACS) wrote a counterfeit detection column for the September 12, 2016 issue of Coin World in which he is clear that he has received "a number of emails and phone calls from confused numismatists" concerning the fantasy overstrike pieces produced by Carr in the last year.

 

Nowhere in that article did it state that the person with the "1922-D" fantasy-date over-strike half dollar paid anything more than "issue" price for it.

 

Have you inquired to find out? Do you even care? What if someone has been defrauded by someone using one of your wares?

 

I have received no such reports. I will inquire.

 

The person perpetrating a fraud is the one who would be responsible for it, of course.

 

You may recall one of my questions (a series of questions if we are going to be technical) concerned this.

 

What fraud is being perpetrated? You made the pieces and you state clearly on you website in caps they are LEGAL. How would the person selling one of your pieces be illegal? If the person sold it, believing your website that the pieces are LEGAL, it is on you, is it not? Yes, you partially replied as to how you warn not to use your piece or try to spend it, and then you claim that you are not stating it is or is not OK to do so, but you are advising not to and erring on the cautious side, but could not answer what is wrong with doing so, since you claim the pieces are LEGAL.

[coinman_23885]

This risk of confusion is no longer hypothetical. Mike Fahey (senior authenticator ANACS) wrote a counterfeit detection column for the September 12, 2016 issue of Coin World in which he is clear that he has received "a number of emails and phone calls from confused numismatists" concerning the fantasy overstrike pieces produced by Carr in the last year.

 

Nowhere in that article did it state that the person with the "1922-D" fantasy-date over-strike half dollar paid anything more than "issue" price for it.

 

Have you inquired to find out? Do you even care? What if someone has been defrauded by someone using one of your wares?

 

I have received no such reports. I will inquire.

 

The person perpetrating a fraud is the one who would be responsible for it, of course.

 

You may recall one of my questions (a series of questions if we are going to be technical) concerned this.

 

What fraud is being perpetrated? You made the pieces and you state clearly on you website in caps they are LEGAL. How would the person selling one of your pieces be illegal? If the person sold it, believing your website that the pieces are LEGAL, it is on you, is it not? Yes, you partially replied as to how you warn not to use your piece or try to spend it, and then you claim that you are not stating it is or is not OK to do so, but you are advising not to and erring on the cautious side, but could not answer what is wrong with doing so, since you claim the pieces are LEGAL.

 

The point being, we have now gone beyond the realm of new info or review of case law or hypos, or repetition of the same points. It is now bordering on the absurd and is starting to appear like keyboard wars that produce nothing but disaster.

 

I couldn't resist.

You're right that the positions of all participants are clear (I think). Thank you for the meaningful dialog, hypotheticals, etc., you have posted throughout the threads.

[dcarr]

What fraud is being perpetrated? You made the pieces and you state clearly on you website in caps they are LEGAL. How would the person selling one of your pieces be illegal? If the person sold it, believing your website that the pieces are LEGAL, it is on you, is it not? Yes, you partially replied as to how you warn not to use your piece or try to spend it, and then you claim that you are not stating it is or is not OK to do so, but you are advising not to and erring on the cautious side, but could not answer what is wrong with doing so, since you claim the pieces are LEGAL.

 

There is no actual fraud being perpetrated with any thing I've minted, that I am aware of, only hypotheticals.

 

Intentional misrepresentation of any item for purposes of financial gain is illegal.

This includes a month-old hotdog deceptively advertised as "fresh" or a buffed and whizzed genuine Morgan dollar intentionally sold as "gem mint state". There is nothing wrong with reminding people not to intentionally misrepresent things upon resale.

 

But if someone is intent on perpetrating fraud, there is no way to prevent the atempt - they will always find some other coin or some thing to attempt it with. The only defense is knowledge.

 

 

 

 

[CaptHenway]

I agree that it's debatable whether a1964-D Peace Dollar would be considered an "original numismatic item". But the fact that all of the 1964-D's are alleged to have been melted, might help, rather than hinder the government in any litigation. And that's because of the dramatucally added value that such an "original numismatic item" would have.

 

The potential value of an original 1964-D Peace Dollar is purely academic because one would be illegal to own. Any potential buyer willing to pay up for an original 1964-D Peace Dollar would have to be familiar with the story of them, and so they would also have to realize that the coin is illegal to own.

 

I'm sorry Mr. Carr, but do we actually have an adjudication that genuine 1964-D Peace Dollars are illegal to own? As many seem to think here, prior case law is useless unless it refers specifically to the same design you're holding.

 

The US Treasury Department, not the courts, say they are illegal in private hands and subject to confiscation. See the last paragraph:

 

 

 

Are they illegal for a citizen of, say, Switzerland to own in Switzerland?