Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;krispy, post: 1335305, member: 19065&quot;]Chris, Subsequent buyers cannot claim ignorance of the law. Carr has simply reminded the initial buyer of what they are buying and this disclaims any malicious attempt from falling back on him. He has covered his backside (CYA) just as much as any advertisement disclaims certain statements they make from liabilities that may arise later.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m not answering here about the posed scenario of the Chinese example you gave because it&#039;s off topic per the piece created by Mr. Carr that we have been discussing the legality of. To discuss another example to compare or justify how the law should or could apply to this one only confuses the issues and intents, as well the recourse each case might take under review by US authorities in the matter. </p><p><br /></p><p>Mr. Carr was also employed/contracted by the US Mint for his past work on circulating coinage designs. It&#039;s not likely he&#039;s going to be breaking laws in regard to his fantasy tokens which might damage that relationship with the US Mint and justice system.[/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