Dcarr over strike question. 1 1

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

 

By contrast, D koan Carr's exonumia are a boost to numismatics, in their small way they are adding to the interest, popularity and collectibility of coins, and he should receive appreciation for his considerable efforts and craftsmanship.

 

 

This has always been my stance as well. I know a few collectors who got intiated into US coins by first collecting Carr coins. It was their gateway. Conversely I know several HEAVYWEIGHTS ( and I don't mean in pounds Roger) of the coin world who collect these as well.

 

mark

 

I certainly appreciate this position.

However, regardless of personal likes or dislikes or perceived benefit to the hobby or not, it does not address the legal issues. This is all the more reason to contact the U.S. Attorney General. After all, I would think it would be in the interest of persons that have the pieces to determine the pieces are legal and not against the law. The only confidence of legality a present owner has is the word of the producer of the pieces. That is not legal assurance, to me and foes not give me confidence that I would not have to forfeit the piece in the future. But I realize that is just my own opinion.

[ldhair]

Mr. Carr has made it clear that everything is OK. Only a few will be swindled and it's all their fault. I feel much better knowing that.

[MJ]

 

By contrast, D koan Carr's exonumia are a boost to numismatics, in their small way they are adding to the interest, popularity and collectibility of coins, and he should receive appreciation for his considerable efforts and craftsmanship.

 

 

This has always been my stance as well. I know a few collectors who got intiated into US coins by first collecting Carr coins. It was their gateway. Conversely I know several HEAVYWEIGHTS ( and I don't mean in pounds Roger) of the coin world who collect these as well.

 

mark

 

I certainly appreciate this position.

However, regardless of personal likes or dislikes or perceived benefit to the hobby or not, it does not address the legal issues. This is all the more reason to contact the U.S. Attorney General. After all, I would think it would be in the interest of persons that have the pieces to determine the pieces are legal and not against the law. The only confidence of legality a present owner has is the word of the producer of the pieces. That is not legal assurance, to me and foes not give me confidence that I would not have to forfeit the piece in the future. But I realize that is just my own opinion.

 

I might. If I indeed questioned their legality. Since I don't, I won't. Why would I?

 

mark

Edited August 28, 2016 by MJ

[Afterword]

We have no right to interpret law and use our interpretation of said law as an excuse to harass and condemn. If someone believes a law has been or is being violated report it to the proper authority, whose job it is to interpret law and they will act or not act accordingly.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

 

By contrast, D koan Carr's exonumia are a boost to numismatics, in their small way they are adding to the interest, popularity and collectibility of coins, and he should receive appreciation for his considerable efforts and craftsmanship.

 

 

This has always been my stance as well. I know a few collectors who got intiated into US coins by first collecting Carr coins. It was their gateway. Conversely I know several HEAVYWEIGHTS ( and I don't mean in pounds Roger) of the coin world who collect these as well.

 

mark

 

I certainly appreciate this position.

However, regardless of personal likes or dislikes or perceived benefit to the hobby or not, it does not address the legal issues. This is all the more reason to contact the U.S. Attorney General. After all, I would think it would be in the interest of persons that have the pieces to determine the pieces are legal and not against the law. The only confidence of legality a present owner has is the word of the producer of the pieces. That is not legal assurance, to me and foes not give me confidence that I would not have to forfeit the piece in the future. But I realize that is just my own opinion.

 

I might. If I indeed questioned their legality. Since I don't, I won't. Why would I?

 

mark

 

I believe there was a recent numismatic legal situation in which the question of why would someone do so was answered.

 

Not questioning legality has been a foolish position that many have determined after the fact was indeed a foolish position, due to the consequences of the head in sand defense.

[coinman_23885]

We have no right to interpret law and use our interpretation of said law as an excuse to harass and condemn. If someone believes a law has been or is being violated report it to the proper authority, whose job it is to interpret law and they will act or not act accordingly.

 

What are you talking about?

 

(1) No one is harassing him.

(2) We absolutely have the right to interpret the law and to make personal and business judgments accordingly. Doing so is the foundation of the business world and all business/financial decisions we make. I won't bore you to tears with examples.

(3) We also have the right to express those views, particularly when it relates to laws enacted to protect our society and our hobby. If there is a question of legality, there is also a legitimate interest to the larger coin community that has members that may not be aware of the relevant issues or potential issues. These threads have potential educational value or at least may provoke others to take a closer look instead of blindly relying on the legal interpretation/posts made by the self interested producer of the coins. This is why I will not stop posting. I am not arguing with his supporters or Carr himself at this point (none of which will care). I post what I post so that others will be aware of the issues/opposition and perhaps be inclined (hopefully) to research the matter more fully.

Edited August 28, 2016 by coinman_23885

[stman]

We have no right to interpret law and use our interpretation of said law as an excuse to harass and condemn. If someone believes a law has been or is being violated report it to the proper authority, whose job it is to interpret law and they will act or not act accordingly.

 

What are you talking about?

 

(1) No one is harassing him.

(2) We absolutely have the right to interpret the law and to make personal and business judgments accordingly. Doing so is the foundation of the business world and all business/financial decisions we make. I won't bore you to tears with examples.

(3) We also have the right to express those views, particularly when it relates to laws enacted to protect our society and our hobby. If there is a question of legality, there is also a legitimate interest to the larger coin community that has members that may not be aware of the relevant issues or potential issues. These threads have potential educational value or at least may provoke others to take a closer look instead of blindly relying on the legal interpretation/posts made by the self interested producer of the coins. This is why I will not stop posting. I am not arguing with his supporters or Carr himself at this point (none of which will care). I post what I post so that others will be aware of the issues/opposition and perhaps be inclined (hopefully) to research the matter more fully.

 

 

Talk about someone sounding like they are off their Meds.

[MJ]

Coinman you make some intelligent and salient points from your POV. Last post not withstanding ; )

 

For me I think they are in a grey area and I side on caution in favor of the entrepreneur. In this case I've come to know Daniel and I'm sure he is a good and knowledgable man. It's hurtful to me when people call him a counterfeiter. That is a label I think is venomous in light of the fact that it's not been proved so. It's cr@p

 

mark

Edited August 28, 2016 by MJ

[nk1nk]

We have no right to interpret law and use our interpretation of said law as an excuse to harass and condemn. If someone believes a law has been or is being violated report it to the proper authority, whose job it is to interpret law and they will act or not act accordingly.

 

 

Well said

[rrantique]

Yep this is a tough nut to crack

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by rrantique

[MJ]

I'll take 100 on this bobsled ride to hell

 

mark

[CascadeChris]

I know dan personally and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt he is a bastion of truly ethical numismatics. His high morals and values while walking a fine line should be applauded not scorned. But I get it. Most don't know the man or truly understand the o/s processes and choose to just dig in on one or two specific possibilities of "what if this or that happens" or "you're destroying our hobby" blah blah blah ad naseum. At first I fought you guys tooth and nail because I didn't think all the unwarranted vitriol against him was fair or right. Now though, I just laugh every naysayer off. These threads are highly entertaining now. And ya know what, all you guys are doing is helping him. And that I like. Long live the moonlight mint and all the wonderfull creations coming forth. His overstrikes are nothing more than hobo nickes of the highest order and his original stuff is great. If I could find Banksy I'd commission him to do the walls of the press room. Two similar artists in their respective fields coming together. Too bad I can't also get Andy Warhol to turn his front door into a Campbell's soup can too.

 

Carry on guys and help the cause. My popcorn is popping

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Coinman you make some intelligent and salient points from your POV. Last post not withstanding ; )

 

For me I think they are in a grey area and I side on caution in favor of the entrepreneur. In this case I've come to know Daniel and I'm sure he is a good and knowledgable man. It's hurtful to me when people call him a counterfeiter. That is a label I think is venomous in light of the fact that it's not been proved so. It's cr@p

 

mark

 

I will disagree.

 

We do agree that he produces fantasy coins which look close enough to the real thing to fool a reasonable person?

 

Me, you and "the law" can decide if he can be punished for it. Just because has not been convicted does not mean he is innocent. Think about our politicans.

[CaptHenway]

Saw this on Facebook, from Coin World, about the 1922-D halves:

 

http://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coins/2016/08/1922-d-half-dollar-struck-at-private-mint.1.html

[CaptHenway]

I'll take 100 on this bobsled ride to hell

 

mark

 

Hell, Michigan?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Saw this on Facebook, from Coin World, about the 1922-D halves:

 

http://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coins/2016/08/1922-d-half-dollar-struck-at-private-mint.1.html

 

It was mentioned and posted a few pages back.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I know dan personally and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt he is a bastion of truly ethical numismatics. His high morals and values while walking a fine line should be applauded not scorned. But I get it. Most don't know the man or truly understand the o/s processes and choose to just dig in on one or two specific possibilities of "what if this or that happens" or "you're destroying our hobby" blah blah blah ad naseum. At first I fought you guys tooth and nail because I didn't think all the unwarranted vitriol against him was fair or right. Now though, I just laugh every naysayer off. These threads are highly entertaining now. And ya know what, all you guys are doing is helping him. And that I like. Long live the moonlight mint and all the wonderfull creations coming forth. His overstrikes are nothing more than hobo nickes of the highest order and his original stuff is great. If I could find Banksy I'd commission him to do the walls of the press room. Two similar artists in their respective fields coming together. Too bad I can't also get Andy Warhol to turn his front door into a Campbell's soup can too.

 

Carry on guys and help the cause. My popcorn is popping

 

You have assumed any person in the hobby that questions the legality/status of the work is in some manner belittling the person or questioning his morals or integrity and ethic(both work and personal).

 

I have not seen heard or read where one person did so. Nor have I seen or heard or read a condemnation of the artistic talent and skill.

 

What is the unwarranted vitriol that offends you? Hobbyists are questioning the legality of the pieces. This is not unwarranted vitriol, in my opinion.

 

You use the term over strike. Fair enough. What, in your opinion,supports and anchors the over strikes to be in compliance with the language of the present laws that exist? There must be some thought that gives you confidence to declare the legitimacy of the pieces. For all I know, and I freely admit I don't know much, the producer of the pieces and/or you have received assurances from the U.S. Attorney General. However, at this particular point in time I have not seen heard or read of any such instance.

 

If this has not happened, I would think the producer would do so. Why not present the situation to the U.S. Attorney General? We are all as good citizens interested in compliance, are we not?

 

After all, using the term "while walking a fine line" would indicate you personally recognize the not so clear aspect of the question of legality, does it not?

 

What would be your position if a similarly talented person copied the original pieces with a slight modification and manufactured them in large quantities at a reduced price? What would the producer of the original pieces think? What would be his reaction? What would you think? Would it not just be another talented person taking hobo nickels to a higher order, in that there would be more availability at a lower price? What if another talented person then did the same to that producer's work?

[mommam17]

It seems to me D. Carr has a lot of talent to do what he does. For me, I would never own any of his creations. With so many beautiful coins available for sale, I don't know why any collector would want to own one? But, I'm sure there is a good reason.

[RWB]

U.S. Code - Counterfeit Coins

 

"Whoever, within the United States, makes or brings therein from any foreign country, or possesses with intent to sell, give away, or in any other manner uses the same, except under authority of the Secretary of the Treasury or other proper officer of the United States, any token, disk, or device in the likeness or similitude as to design, color, or the inscription thereon of any of the coins of the United States or of any foreign country issued as money, either under the authority of the United States or under the authority of any foreign government shall be fined under this title.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 709; July 16, 1951, ch. 226, § 3, 65 Stat. 122; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(B), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2146.)"

 

This applies to everyone including those living in Colorado.

[physics-fan3.14]

[MJ]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

[MJ]

Jason, I think I can still see that horse breathing. We better make sure it's dead

 

mark

[physics-fan3.14]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

That is the most ludicrous claim. I know it's what Dcarr keeps spouting, but it is absurd.

 

So if I take Chanel Number 5 and add a few ingredients of my own, it is ok?

If I take a genuine Louis Vuitton bag and cut it up and resow it into my own design, its ok?

If I disassemble a genuine '65 Mustang and make a new car out of the parts, its ok?

 

Do you see how ridiculous this claim sounds?

[RWB]

The material used, including a normal US coin, is immaterial. All unmarked "replicas" are counterfeits by definition of law.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

The information has been presented many times on this subject along with many legal presentations.

 

It is a little silly to state the creations are legal tender to start with. That position I have not seen or heard or read before. Innovative it might be, and wordsmith talent at its finest. However, it is not the righteous position I would use as a first line supportive response of legal justification. It has a little bit of a flim flam feel to it. That is just me, of course.

 

"There are 8 million stories in the Naked City. This is one of them.Only the dates and names have been changed."

 

What is the tunnel vision, other than the producer of the pieces not asking the U.S. Attorney General for, at the least, an opinion? Why is this not a sound business practice, if a person wants to make certain their position is in accordance with U.S. law? It may be tunnel vision not to do so.

[MJ]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

That is the most ludicrous claim. I know it's what Dcarr keeps spouting, but it is absurd.

 

So if I take Chanel Number 5 and add a few ingredients of my own, it is ok?

If I take a genuine Louis Vuitton bag and cut it up and resow it into my own design, its ok?

If I disassemble a genuine '65 Mustang and make a new car out of the parts, its ok?

 

Do you see how ridiculous this claim sounds?

 

All air balls Jason. I've been in a number of depositions regarding trade dress and TM infringements. My last was with Adidas. I'm kind of the go to guy.

 

I'm a designer and I have my original works copied all the time I'll say yes to all of the above.

 

Take your perfume example. It's done all the time. That's how you can come up with other fragrances. You can not call the fragrance Chanel 5 . D Carr doesn't call his fantasy coins anything else but fantasy coins.

 

You can take a LV bag cut it up and change it. LV may or may not take the time to come after you for TM infringement or trade dress. However, 100% this is a poor counterfeit example unless it is represented as an original LV piece. It's called street art.

 

Your Mustang example is down me all the time. Watch some car auctions. They are just not represented as original Mustangs

 

 

mark

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by MJ

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Jason, I think I can still see that horse breathing. We better make sure it's dead

 

mark

 

It is the wrong horse being beaten. Until such time the correct horse, legality, is adjudicated, there is no need for a medical consult.

[MJ]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

The information has been presented many times on this subject along with many legal presentations.

 

It is a little silly to state the creations are legal tender to start with. That position I have not seen or heard or read before. Innovative it might be, and wordsmith talent at its finest. However, it is not the righteous position I would use as a first line supportive response of legal justification. It has a little bit of a flim flam feel to it. That is just me, of course.

 

"There are 8 million stories in the Naked City. This is one of them.Only the dates and names have been changed."

 

What is the tunnel vision, other than the producer of the pieces not asking the U.S. Attorney General for, at the least, an opinion? Why is this not a sound business practice, if a person wants to make certain their position is in accordance with U.S. law? It may be tunnel vision not to do so.

 

Every fantasy coin starts out as legal tender. If he makes a fantasy date SLQ it starts out as a SLQ. You can actually see the host coin under the new strike. If he makes a fantasy date Peace dollar it starts out as a genuine Peace dollar.

 

mark

Edited August 28, 2016 by MJ

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

That is the most ludicrous claim. I know it's what Dcarr keeps spouting, but it is absurd.

 

So if I take Chanel Number 5 and add a few ingredients of my own, it is ok?

If I take a genuine Louis Vuitton bag and cut it up and resow it into my own design, its ok?

If I disassemble a genuine '65 Mustang and make a new car out of the parts, its ok?

 

Do you see how ridiculous this claim sounds?

 

All air balls Roger. I've been in a number of depositions regarding trade dress and TM infringements. My last was with Adidas. I'm kind of the go to guy.

 

Since I'm a designer and I have my original works copied all the time I'll say yes to all of the above.

 

Take your perfume example. It's done all the time. That's how you can come up with other fragrances. You can not call the fragrance Chanel 5 . D Carr doesn't call his fantasy coins anything else but fantasy coins.

 

You can take a LV bag cut it up and change it. LV may or may not take the time to come after you for TM infringement or trade dress. However, 100% this is a poor counterfeit example unless it is represented as an original LV piece. It's called street art.

 

Your Mustang example is dome me all the time. Watch some car auctions. They are just not represented as original Mustangs

 

 

mark

 

I would be very interested in the legal tender position you have espoused. Could you elaborate? I assume it is more than precious metal content. I hope so.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Great info RWB. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to these fantasy pieces since they are in fact legal tender to start with. The host coin is the same denomination and type. Only the dates/ MM are changed to that of dates and mint marks that don't exist.

 

If he was striking these on blank planchets and using dates that exist then that's when the Frd's start knocking on doors.

 

Tunnel vision abound

 

mark

 

 

The information has been presented many times on this subject along with many legal presentations.

 

It is a little silly to state the creations are legal tender to start with. That position I have not seen or heard or read before. Innovative it might be, and wordsmith talent at its finest. However, it is not the righteous position I would use as a first line supportive response of legal justification. It has a little bit of a flim flam feel to it. That is just me, of course.

 

"There are 8 million stories in the Naked City. This is one of them.Only the dates and names have been changed."

 

What is the tunnel vision, other than the producer of the pieces not asking the U.S. Attorney General for, at the least, an opinion? Why is this not a sound business practice, if a person wants to make certain their position is in accordance with U.S. law? It may be tunnel vision not to do so.

 

Every fantasy coin starts out as legal tender. If he makes a fantasy date SLQ it starts out as a SLQ. You can actually see the host coin under the new strike. If he makes a fantasy date Peace dollar it starts out as a genuine Peace dollar.

 

mark

 

I am sure you are aware of the fallacy of the position. You are relying on the term "host coin" as support for and as an interchangeable definition of legal tender and fantasy piece, via modification. Not to make a big deal of it, but no, all fantasy coins do not start out as a host coin. Host coin/fantasy piece/legal tender are not synonymous or interchangeable in the meaning of the law concerning the creations under discussion. I applaud the the effort of presenting a unique theory and certainly realize the talent to be able to do so. It is what a good attorney should do; use every possible presentation that supports the position of client.

 

It would be so much easier to contact the U.S. Attorney General, I think. That is just me, though.