The legality of owning/selling counterfeits

goaded into a rage, probably by a sock puppet, made a lawsuit threat, got banned.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

dang.... must have been awhile back....why I have not seen his comments.

 

FYI, this was brought up in another thread at least a month ago.
I provided the link to the direct reference of what Kurt posted *online*. Kurt's profile has been since deleted I believe.
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/doing-an-hour-on-radio-monday.331101/page-6#post-3320717

 

I own one DC coin. I own it as "art work" per se. And of course DC been vetted in his production concepts. So ... it works for me.

I wish they would do something about the importation of coins from particularly China. I don't care that they don't follow our laws, they shouldn't be allowed to sell them online and available in our country to buy online. But that's something different.

I don't think I own any modern counterfeits though.

 

Can we please keep the thread relevant to the questions originally posed?

 

You asked the question

 

I for one glad you brought this counterfeit up... its pretty devastating when you buy one and think you got a good deal and find out why it was a good deal later..very demoralizing shakes my confidence some

 

That’s why I said ORIGINALLY posed. Plus it only required a single response, not a full discussion

 

I never been one for delving into legal verbiage and the like. Knowingly selling a counterfeit anything is morally and hopefully legally wrong.

I struggle a bit with this. I have a counterfeit 1916-D Mercury dime in my dime book. I keep the real 1916-D in my bank box. The counterfeit was actually done quite well. It was an added mintmark done many years ago. I sometimes struggle with the moral dilemma of owning the piece. I could never attempt to market it as genuine. But then again, I also believe there is something of a numismatic history attached to the piece. I have settled with a written note in the book stating the piece is counterfeit.

If I did have a dark side and chose to market my counterfeit 1916-D I would fully expect that I would suffer the legal consequences of my action. However I also somewhat doubt that the FBI has the resources to track down and prosecute a guy marketing a counterfeit. And that is too bad considering personal morality these days seems a rare trait.

 

Actually, if I understand it correctly, what you have is a real 1916 dime, that was altered to be a 1916-D dime ?
So it's still authentic US currency; just "damaged" to deceive collectors as a cashier would still accept it worth 10 cents.

 

That would be correct.

 

The law goes into altering coins with an intent to deceive. The coin is still illegal to sell as a wholly-genuine coin. When it comes time to dispose of it, you can A) destroy it, B) donate it to the ANA, C) give it to a dealer for his/her black cabinet, or D) send it to ICG and get it in one of ther “Educational” slabs.

 

The Trade Dollar was remonetized.
"Trade dollars were again made legal tender by the Coinage Act of 1965, which stated in part "All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations), regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties and dues."
It goes on to say that the bullion value is worth more than face, and many counterfeit Trade Dollars were produced.

 

check with a lawyer, but what is the deception?
it is still an original dime.
someone was not trying to "convert" it in order to deceive someone in thinking it is a quarter.

Here is the murky area where the "deception" was to a collector who values it above face value. Versus it's actual value before and after "alteration" is still 10 cents for "commerce" which is clearly stipulated in the law.

This requires lawyer speak and lawyer interpretation. Interpreting the laws with a bias towards a "coin collector" who values coins above face value may not be the intent of the laws. Although, I have no idea.

but the law .. to copy it here from your post ...
for introduction into or distribution in commerce, or the sale in commerce of any imitation numismatic item which is not plainly and permanently marked "copy", is unlawful and is an unfair or deceptive act or practice in commerce

"in commerce" can be the deciding factor. His dime is not "imitation"
So a dime is still worth 10 cents, and if it's an original dime, though altered it is still worth 10 cents for commerce.

But once we insert our biases into legal description, then we interpret and support our interpretation as we see fit for our purpose. We would have to search for legal precedent to get the concept and intent of the law. Since I am not a trial lawyer in this expertise I really have no further input as this is just a discussion, although to put it in support of your statement, someone's intent was fradulent in altering the dime (which can then throw us into the realm of CC type coins/tokens) and thus fradulent in selling it without proper disclosure for an intended deceptive purpose which was not for commerce.

 

Or, you can sell it as exactly what it is...an altered "wholly-genuine" 1916 dime. There is absolutely nothing illegal about such an item. It is not a counterfeit coin any more than a hobo nickel would be.

It IS illegal to sell it as something it isn't--ie, a 1916-D dime. But, even then the illegal action is fraud--not counterfeiting.

 

There's nothing morally wrong about selling a counterfeit as a counterfeit, it's only when you try and deceive someone passing it off as real or something along those lines does it become immoral.

 

You only quoted the HPA. Here is the other legislation I linked:

“Whoever buys, sells, exchanges, transfers, receives, or delivers any false, forged, counterfeited, or altered obligation or other security of the United States, with the intent that the same be passed, published, or used as true and genuine”

No ambiguous interpretation there. Selling it as a wholly-genuine 1916 D dime is illegal. Removing the mintmark (effectively “destroying” the fakery) or pursuing any of the other aforementioned avenues would keep you out of hot water.

 

“Whoever buys, sells, exchanges, transfers, receives, or delivers any false, forged, counterfeited, or altered obligation or other security of the United States, with the intent that the same be passed, published, or used as true and genuine”

"used as true or genuine" Once again, you conveniently gloss over the fact that it is perfectly legal to sell it as what it is--an altered coin. It is only illegal to fraudulently represent it as something it isn't.

 

Once again, you conveniently ignored my very clear starement:

 

Also, if you read the original post, I clearly took this stance and quoted the law to back it up. I really have no idea where you are getting the idea that I think that the coin is illegal to own/buy/sell in every circumstance. I clearly stated that was illegal ONLY if it was sold as a “wholly-genuine” coin, meaning the coin as a whole, including the mintmark, is sold as genuine.