Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 2171250, member: 112"]And he's not creating new pieces ? By any definition that you can possibly think of he is absolutely creating new pieces. Take the subject of the title of this thread, the '16 Barber half, has one ever existed before ? Have you even seen one other than those created by Daniel ? No, you haven't, and neither has anybody else. So they are absolutely new pieces. Any time a new coin is struck over an old coin, the old coin ceases to exist and a new coin comes into existence. So what ? Previously minted coins have been used as planchets for striking completely new coins by many countries in the world for centuries. The concept is nothing new. It is merely a cheap, inexpensive, method of obtaining planchets for the new coins. And that is exactly what Daniel is doing. Does the source of the planchets used for the new coins make a difference ? No it doesn't because it cannot. And those replicas made by the Westminster Mint, or any of the number of other private mints that do the same thing they do, how do you know the source of their planchets are not genuine US Mint coins as well ? Junk silver US coins are sold and melted every day, by the ton, and formed into new planchets used for these replicas. So by your reasoning does that not make them the same as Daniel's, or so close to being the same as to not matter ? Daniel uses the source of his planchets as a come on, an advertising gimmick, to get people to pay ridiculous prices for what he produces. And that's all it is. Is there anything wrong with that ? No, there is not. But it should at least be recognized for what it is. I don't think there is a loophole. The supposition is that the law doesn't apply to what Daniel does because he's minting fantasy coins, coins that either never existed, or, in the case of the '64 Peace, were never issued, and therefore what Daniel produces cannot be considered as being replicas of genuine US coins. And what does he do to make them different ? He puts a different date on them. But I believe that is a false supposition. Take a look at the silver rounds produced by Westminster that I posted links to above. Most of them don't have dates on them at all. So by the reasoning that Daniel uses, and that used by his proponents and fans, those rounds produced by Westminster and other private mints are not replicas either. So they should be exempt from having to have COPY on them too. But they don't, every single one of them has COPY on it. Why ? Because that is what they are, copies. The designs of genuine US coins are being copied to make those silver rounds. So my question is, if none of those other private mints are not exempt from the law when their replicas are far, far, more different than genuine US coins than Daniel's replicas are - then why is Daniel exempt from the law ? Daniel's replicas, his fantasy coins, are pretty much exact replicas of genuine US coins with the only difference being the date he puts on them. So how is Daniel exempt from the law ? Answer - he isn't. But so far he has gotten away with it. I ask you, which is a closer representation, a closer replica, of a genuine US coin - this - <img src="http://www.moonlightmint.com/gallery_files/image005.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> Or this - <img src="http://www.coin-rare.com/images/products/detail/NK5423PeaceDollarOBVREV.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> And yet which one has COPY on it, as the law dictates, and which one doesn't ? So no, there is no loophole.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches