Just got the elusive 1916 Barber Half....

ditto.

come on guys, if you like them, buy them.

If not, move on

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Whether it still exists is immaterial to the debate, it did in fact exist at one point. And does this mean that the Chinese 1798-CC Trade Dollars are really just fantasy pieces? Maybe we should strike them on Morgan Dollars and sell them on eBay much like Carr struck 1964 Franklins over Kennedy Half Dollars. Or better yet, how about a business strike 1895 Morgan? None of those supposedly exist either. Hmm... The possibilities are endless. I think Carr owes Alibaba (if they are producing the 1964-D pieces) an apology. I hope Alibaba sues him for unfair business practices/fair competition laws (IMO) and tortious interference with a business relationship.

As always, everything is meant as opinion.

 

It did?

Aside from Mr. Carr's pieces?

 

Let's just ask this. @dcarr did you get legal opinions on your work and if so could you please post it so all of the "lawyers" posting on this board making accusations can see?

 

Per the government, yes the pieces existed.

 

I don't care if he has seen a lawyer or not. Lawyers and judges are wrong all the time. This is why we have appellate courts!

And if he did in fact see an attorney, I would like to know exactly what he told his counsel. Did you tell the attorney everything without bias or selective gloss of the facts of the production?

@dcarr

 

I care. I would like to see what someone had to say.

 

Of course not, Dan. That's why these threads devolving around your business activities are unproductive. They give you marketing, I'll give them that. But, sure, when charges of that nature are leveled at your business, naturally, you're put on the defensive, provoked.

Look, do you want me to defend you? Guys, let him alone. The Justice Department is letting him alone, isn't it? What does that tell you, but that he's in the clear?

Didn't work, huh? Ah, OK. Never mind. But mind this, Dan. You're a loser on whether the Government can get you. Just read the statutes. You get a defense lawyer who can read, he's going to have fits with your generating records like this, as they're discoverable. Before long, he's going to be asking, "Where do I fit in?"

 

Sorry, I've lost the subthread of your question. What are you comparing again?

 

I smell a lawsuit. Defamation of character without any real evidence is a serious offense.

 

And this is a serious accusation that deserves clarification.

To whom are you speaking, sir?

 

Unsubscribe..........

 

This is not defamation/libel. First, truth (and a good number of the critical statements are accurate and true) is a good and absolute defense. Moreover, suing would open up Carr's coins to a legal adjudication and this could easily backfire on him. Second, people are allowed to express honest opinions. Only material misrepresentations of fact are tortious. And therein lies a crucial distinction. Opinions, even unfavorable opinions, are protected speech. Third, a lawsuit could potentially be met with a malicious prosecution countersuit and perhaps even a HPA suit depending on the members targeted. Bottom line: I don't think he has a cause of action and I think any attempt to pursue a lawsuit would backfire and potentially burn him badly.

 

Fourth, what are his damages? This isn't per se, damages aren't presumed. And Dan's a nice guy, so that would be fifth.

 

Because it relates or potentially relates to his profession, it would be understood to be the per se variants of the torts; thus, damages would be presumed. It would cap damages. And there are a whole bunch of other potential defenses, but why bore everyone?

 

Yeah, it relates to his business, that's right. It impugns the chastity of his business. I'll take his retainer.

 

Actually this is a bunch of couch lawyers spouting opinion (as duly and appreciatedly noted). I would really be interested on hearing what Dan's lawyer's opinions are - if they could be shared.

 

I am not robbing anyone's "legacy" by over-striking one of their designs (in the form of a worn coin) while keeping the same design but with the appearance of new date.

Don't you think that a "hobo" nickel carver is doing a disservice to the coin's original designer (Fraser) by making his portrait of a Native American look like a Caucasian hobo ? I don't see you complaining about that. I think Fraser (and Native Americans) would be far more offended by that hobo nickel than Barber would ever be (if at all) by seeing one of his coins over-struck to simply give it the appearance of having a new date on it.

And every certificate that I issue my coins with clearly states who the original designer of the coin was ("Charles Barber" in this case). I have never claimed them as my own designs.

Peace dollar and Barber half dollar designs are public domain.
But for copyrighted works, an artist has the right to defend their copyright. Several pieces that I previously minted have been carved by various coin carvers. I don't mind that at all. Once they purchase one of my GENUINE pieces, it is theirs to do with as they please. Once I legally acquire a Barber half dollar, it is mine to do with as I please (so long as there is no fraud involved and nobody is harmed). But when it comes to a bad poorly-crafted knock-off of one of my copyrighted original designs, it becomes necessary to defend it or lose it.

 

This is getting so stupid and out of hand, why wasn't this thread locked 5 pages ago?