Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Blissskr, post: 2611813, member: 34882&quot;]No my interpretation doesn&#039;t matter go read post #575 specifically go and read the entire linked Hobby Protection Act or read the excerpt I provided. That is not interpretation or opinion it&#039;s the actual law and it is very very clear that imitation numismatic items must be marked &#039;copy&#039;. And just because the government moves incredibly slow in doing anything doesn&#039;t mean they are never going to act or get around to taking action. </p><p><br /></p><p>And again if you or any other Carr supporter want to try and explain why after having read the relevant court opinions, actions as well as the HPA itself, on why Carr&#039;s items don&#039;t need to be marked &#039;copy&#039;. I&#039;m all ears and very open to consider what defense allows his coins to be unmarked. I&#039;d also like to know just how his works don&#039;t meet the definition of &#039;imitation numismatic item&#039; as defined by the court and still used as precedent to this day. As they seem to meet the definition almost word for word but again if someone wants to elucidate why they don&#039;t meet that criteria and thus are exempt I&#039;d like to hear and consider the reasoning for that.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in