2009 Proof A.S.E. now on sale

This isn't the fiist time I minted a coin that they sold. A few years ago, I minted some "Presidential Preview Medallions" for them, and they were sold on TV leading up to the release of the US Mint's first President Dollar:
http://designscomputed.com/coins/pres_2007.html
Say what you will about their other offerings, but those Presidential Preview Medallions were winners for the buyers - they've been selling for a significant permium over the CSN issue price on eBay. CSN/HSN sold them for about $7 each ($28 set of 4). They routinely sell for $20-$50 on eBay per coin ($80-$200 per set). Search the completed listings in the "coins" category on eBay for the word "concept". Several completed auctions for them will show.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I almost pulled the trigger as well. Actually had one in checkout, but then stopped myself and decided to buy a certified Ike for my set instead. Almost an impulse buy again for me but then stuck with my collecting focus. Enjoy your 2009-DC. TC

 

That is NOT what the document said. You need to re-read it. It said that none were issued and that they are subject to confiscation.

I think that the design issue is what bothers most. At least it's what bothers me most. I just don't understand how any Joe Engraver can engrave dies to look exactly like US Mint dies and sell the coins. If not covered under either of the two previously mentioned laws it certainly violates the spirit of those laws.

I enjoy the pieces. I think that his work is incredible. I just don't think that he has a right to do it exactly how he does it.

 

If someone were to take a 2010 ASE and alter it by putting a 2012 date on it, would that be legal? 2012 ASEs obviously do not exist (yet). So what then would happen in a couple years when 2012 ASEs presumably would come into existence?

Earlier in this thread someone said that just because something is legal to do doesn’t mean that it’s the right thing to do. I for one agree with that statement. I do not like it when people use grey area loopholes to get around doing “the right thing”.

A true artist would not copy someone else’s design. They would create their own.

 

So which one is selling better, the 2009 or the 1964? Are you selling both thru HSN or just the 2009? I forgot about your Geo Washington rendering totally!!

 

I should clarify that what I meant was, according to the government (and that's what counts !) no 1964 Peace Dollars exist.

"All of the trial strikes for this proposed 1964 dollar were ordered destroyed under the strict supervisory and accounting procedures required by Mint regulations. None reached the final stage of being counted, bagged and issued by the Mint's cashier as finished coins."

I would take that to mean that the government's position is that none exist.

I would agree that the "spirit" of the law would have been broken IF I were to create Peace dollars out of something that wasn't, and/or changed them to look like a different date that was actually issued, or could potentially be issued. (I have not done, and will not do, that).

PS:
Fortunately, "Joe Engraver", in general, does not have the skill and technique to accurately replicate existing coins by engraving dies. "Transfer dies" (made by molding an existing coin) is another matter, but has it's own issues.

 

Only the 2009-DC "proofed" Silver Eagles are sold through CSN (HSN and Coin Vault). I sell the "1964-D" fantasy over-struck Peace Dollars myself. I've already announced that the total mintage of all the "1964" fantasy Peace Dollars (ALL issues COMBINED) will be 2,000 or less. I don't know yet if I'll make that many. The first batch have a subdued-luster finish (struck four times at 200 tons). The second (current) batch have strong "cartwheel" luster (struck once at 300+ tons). These look the best. At the end, I may polish the dies and make a run of "DMPL" (polished proof-like) coins. And then that will be it. All types combined will be 2,000 or less.

The 2009-DC "proofed" Silver Eagles have sold in greater numbers due to the TV exposure. I'm guessing the final mintage of those will be about 10,000. They will be sold on various shows during the latter part of 2010.

 

I thought of that possibility (no, I wasn't considering doing it). If there is a potential that something could come into existence, then I would treat it the same as something that did already exist. For example, I wouldn't make a "2010" proof Silver Eagle overstrike until it was a certainty that the US Mint didn't issue them. And, if in 2011 I do make some,
they would have a permanent "DC" identifying mark like the 2009-DC "proofed" coins have.

I mentioned my reasoning for doing it the way I did. Mostly, I wanted to experience what it would be like to hold a freshly-minted 1964-D Peace Dollar in my hand. Judging by the email feedback I've received so far from buyers of the coins, I've made a lot of collectors very happy by allowing them to experience that as well.

Most of what I do is my own original artwork on coins. These two ("1964-D" fantasy over-struck Peace Dollar and 2009-DC "proofed" Silver Eagle) are the only coin "re-creations" that I have done. Everything else I've minted has been my own designs.

"Art" can be about more than just the thing itself. Sometimes, what happens to the work after it is made is part of the "art". (See my previous post regarding "Boggs" in this thread on Friday, 3:20 AM).

 

I suppose Daniel Carr could answer this since two of his designs were accepted by the US Mint.

Daniel? What did you have to sign before receiving your award?

 

Release of rights to the design, declaration that my design used no copyrighted material, etc.
This did not, however, mean that the US Mint had exclusive copyrights to the design.
It meant that I no longer had a copyright on the design.

 

Why is it fortunate? I don't think that anyone has the right to copy government coin designs (let alone current designs) and their level of skill is completely inconsequential.

 

You had to sign over the rights to the design and declare that there are no copyrighted materials within because that is what the Mint needs to retain the rights to the design. You no longer have a copyright because you gave yours to the US Mint (to combine with it's own rights). I believe that they do indeed own the copyrights to their coin designs and that you are infringing on that copyright.

I am however not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, so this is pure conjecture on my part and therefore it is purely HMO.

 

You almost got it. The reason for the signed release forms is so that the Mint has some recourse in case some third party goes after them for copyright violation because the artist submitting the design used copyrighted elements in it. That scenario did occur with the "Ocean in View" nickel submitted by of the AIP program artists. After the coin was minted, it was discovered that the artist had based their original design on a copyrighted photograph. That photographer later received a cash settlement from the US Mint. So the signed release form is more of a formality - it doesn't always provide recourse. The signed release does prevent the artist form transferring the copyright to anyone else.

No, that is not correct. Designs created by government employees, once released to the public, are public domain (because those employees are paid by taxpayers).

In some cases, however, the Mint will arrange for a private artist to retain copyrights on a coin design, because the Mint can not hold those copyrights. This was the case with Glenna Goodacre and the Sacagawea dollar obverse. The Mint arranged for her to retain the copyright, while granting the US Mint full rights to use it. Goodacre continued to publicly sell terra-cotta reliefs of the original design, and other related Sacagawea dollar collectibles, after the coins had started minting. She could do this because she had the copyright. On the other hand, when another private outfit (the "Washington Mint") produced and sold over-size Sacagawea copy rounds (gold-plated silver), they were sued by the Mint on behalf of Glenna Goodacre. The Washington Mint was forced to stop producing and selling that "round". I believe that this is the only case where the US Mint has ever sued anyone for a copyright violation over an actual coin design.

So, the only instances when USA coin designs are copyrighted is when the Mint arranges for the artist to retain that copyright for the Mint. Take a look here:
http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/?action=busGuide&sub=busReplicas

This section in particular:
"The United States Mint owns copyright in several commemorative and circulating coin designs. Although the copyright symbol does not appear on the coin itself, the United States Mint generally includes the symbol on marketing materials. Copyrighted coin designs include several designs used in the 1995-1996 Olympic Commemorative Coin Program, the 1995 Civil War Battlefield Commemorative Coin Program and the Golden Dollar (Sacagawea) coin obverse."

Note that specific mention is made of the Sacagawea Dollar OBVERSE, and not the reverse. That is because the Mint arranged for Goodacre to hold the copyright for them. The reverse of the Sacagawea dollar was designed by Thomas D Rodgers, a US Mint employee (at the time), and so there is no copyright on that side of the coin.

All of the other coin designs listed as copyrighted were created by outside artists, not Mint staff. Earlier coin designs, as well as other modern coin designs, are often not copyrighted because the Mint didn't structure their arrangement with the artist that way. For example, they didn't make those arrangements with me and so there is no Mint copyright on the New York and Rhode Island state quarter designs, even though an outside artist (me) designed them.

 

If "Joe Engraver" could accurately make copy coins, there would be a lot more fakes of existing coins out there. And by that I mean fakes of coins that are widely collected (like the 1909-S VDB Lincoln cent, for example). I know what you are going to say. Why am I any different ? I am not creating legal-tender coins out of something that wasn't already legal tender (at the same face value) to start with. I am NOT altering coins to make dates and/or mint-marks that actually exist. I take a genuine coin and change the date and/or mint mark to something that never existed (or doesn't exist according to the government). Like a "hobo" nickel. And I don't ever try to pass them off as something they aren't.

PS: See my post regarding copyrights above.

 

In my opinion, the 1964 Peace Dollar, the "Proofed" 2009 ASE, and anything like them are FAKES and should be marked as such. The Hobo nickel argument is moot because the general public can look at it tell it is an altered coin. You are manufacturing a product that WILL decieve someone at some point, so in my opinion you are responsible for producing a replica without marking them. The argument that you are making something that never existed is false, 2009 ASE's exist, Peace Dollars exist. Let's say I took $1 bills and scrubbed the ink and printed Series of 1976 $50 bills and call them Bicentennial Commemorative bills (Series of 1976 $50's don't exist). WHEN, not if, someone tries to pass one as genuine they are going to hunt me down for counterfeiting. For whatever reason, the Fed doesn't seem to care about couterfeit coins (or there wouldn't as big of a problem with China) or you would be in the same boat. Just my opinion, and I won't be paying a premium for a fake, sorry.

 

Dan,

I must admit that I only know of your work as a result of all the chatter in the forums over these 2009 ASE proofs. Others who are aware of your work speak very highly of your talents. While I stand by what I said about a “true artist”, it probably shouldn’t have been said here since as you say, you do create your own designs. So for that I apologize.

A contention of mine is that items like these altered coins open the door wider for unscrupulous individuals to profit (steel) from the newer, and therefore somewhat naïve, collectors. It would be nice if the coin collecting community, and those who deal with its members, was filled with decent, honest people. But we all know otherwise. The coin collecting hobby has become so tarnished as of late due to the proliferation of fake coins and that not only hurts the hobby, but also the value of the true coins.

Another thing to ponder is where do we draw the line when it comes to filling our albums. Do we buy Chinese copy coins and fill in the blanks until we perhaps someday buy a real one. Questions like that need to be answered by each individual. I’m OK with leaving the spots empty. Even though these coins (2009 proofs) may not technically be copies or replicas, I’m surprised the Mint would allow them without a marking that indicates they are altered. (Stamping a “D” or a “DC” on the coin doesn’t count. They could be misinterpreted as Denver or the District of Columbia).

The flip side to all this is that many seemingly decent people have expressed eager interest in these coins and they’ve backed it up by getting out their checkbooks. If no law is being broken then they are entitled. So from that perspective you’re filling a niche.

This issue could be easily debated on either side and I do thank you for coming here and offering your viewpoint. I do wish you well. But I’ll hope that in the future you stick to your own designs.

Dave

 

the only problem with your argument is the $1 into a $50. To be fair to Mr. Carr he is taking a $50 and changing it into a "bicentennial" $50 to use your analogy. He is NOT changing the denomination or intrinsic value, and that's why your argument won't apply.

I do, however agree with the rest of your statement. Eagles exist and peace dollars exist and anything that so strongly resembles the actual product should be labeled as such so as not to confuse the real from the fantasy.

 

A comparison of apples to oranges IMO. On one hand comparing the duplication of a non-existent form a currency from a collectible standpoint while on the other hand comparing the monetary "value" of that duplicate currency.

If folks want to buy the Moonlight Mint Product for $125 and then spend it at the local convenience store for $1.00, they would be completely within their rights to do so and it would be totally legal since they are actually spending a real silver dollar and the clerk would accept it as "one dollar". This would even be true at a bank. As with any collectible coin, these still hold their original government issue value.

On the other hand, if the Moonlight mint had changed the reverse from "ONE DOLLAR" to "FIFTY DOLLARS", then and only then could a prosecutable counterfeiting charge be filed and enforced.

The "bleach the paper" and reprint a different denomination issues come up during every discussion of this piece and do represent a true comparison for counterfeiting but the denomination of the piece being discussed here has not changed. It's still "only" worth a buck down at the local store or bank just like ANY other Peace Dollar.

A counterfeit from a federal law perspective is different than a counterfeit from a collectible standpoint.

If an 1893-S Morgan Dollar is produced from a genuine Morgan Dollar parent piece, then thats a "collectors counterfeit" intended to deceive coin collectors. It still carries its original issue price of $1 so would fall out of the area of enforcement by the Secret Service or US Treasury. However, it's also a restrike of an existing collectible coin based upon US Mint records. These were produced, monetized, and released to US Banks for consumers use as a one dollar unit of currency.

316,106 1964-D Peace Dollar were produced but were never monetized nor released to US Banks. According to US Mint records, all were destroyed. Two pieces that had been sent to Washington for analysis did survive that initial destruction but upon their discovery, they too were destroyed. Had they been sent to the Smithsonian such as the 1933 Double Eagles, then we would not be having this discussion as the coins would in fact exist.

No 1964-D Peace dollars exist. If any did, they would most certainly have shown up by now. Yes, people have said they've seen them but folks have reported seeing Elvis since August 16th, 1977.

Remember, the 1913 Liberty Nickel was not supposed to exist yet a scant 7 years later, they made their public appearance. Were they illegal? Yes. Were they confiscated? No.

I truely believe that if any 1964-D Peace Dollars existed today, that their owner(s) would follow suit with what the Langbords have done with their 1933 Double Eagles.

I do not believe that the US Government would destroy any confiscated or surrendered 1964-D Peace Dollars just like they did not destroy the Langbord coins even though they should have. I believe that the dollars would be displayed at ANA Conventions just like the Langbord coins since they too would be considered more of "The Nation's most treasured Numismatic Specimens".

As a final point, should any authentic 1964-D Peace Dollar eventually turn up, then, and only then, will "Lucy have some 'splainin to do" and I hope Lucy has given that some thought.

On the bright side, maybe, just maybe, this activity by the Moonlight Mint will bring any or those "authentic" 1964-D Peace Dollars out into the Public. If that happens, I don;t know what Lucy's gonna do then!

 

Why do you feel that the Langbord coins should have been destroyed? The latest I’ve read on the case suggests that the Mint is having a hard time proving that the coins could not possibly have left the Mint as monetized coins. Apparently there was some sloppy record keeping and discrepancies in the paper work. To destroy those coins would be the coin world’s equivalent of destroying documents from the Library of Alexandria.

What I find to be both ridiculous and appalling is the amount of tax payer dollars that have been spent throughout the years (Secret Service and litigation) trying to confiscate and destroy what amounts to a handful of $20 accounting entries to the government. We’re not talking about a mass produced counterfeit coin. We’re talking about a handful of coins that were legitimately produced by the Mint. Whether or not they were legitimately produced is not the question. What is the question is whether or not they were legitimately monetized and released to the public. Whether they were or weren’t, or you OK with millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars being spent to resolve the issue?

 

Illegal, sold-out coins...that is all that these No-Longer-Silver-Eagles are...