Topic: Daniel Carr's Fantasy Coinage. AKA: Bikeracks. After school.

Or perhaps the word COPY prominently displayed on one side of the counterfeit, as required by law?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree with that point aside with the fooled by them part. We live in a super searchable world and in the future it will be even more integrated and ingrained.

And if I was confused about that I apologize but the point is valid

 

Let's say in 50yrs a Carr peace is worth 25k and let's say in 150yrs it will be worth 100k. Get my point? That a lot of "what ifs."

 

To me, it's the same thing that China is doing to our hobby. It's just wrong to me.

 

A lot of what ifs doesn't mean the low lives will not try to take advantage , it's more of a given . That given a way to con someone , they will ! I also think the word copy should be stamped on the reverse just like everyone else that produces copies of US coinage .

 

That's why I don't understand the complacency about Carr's crap. Chinese counterfeiter's found a loophole in the law that didn't require them to use the word "REPLICA" as long as the coins were sold only in the Asian market. So, they sell them to someone in Asia who exports them to other parts of the world. In Carr-nivore's case, he uses the loophole claiming it to be an overstrike. edited Why should these enthusiasts be up in arms about China when they have their own CARR-nivore here to contend with?

Chris

 

18 U.S.C. 487
Whoever, without lawful authority, makes any die, hub, or mold, or any part thereof, either of steel or plaster, or any other substance, in likeness or similitude, as to the design or the inscription thereon, of any die, hub, or mold designated for the coining or making of any of the genuine gold, silver, nickel, bronze, copper, or other coins coined at the mints of the United States; or
Whoever, without lawful authority, possesses any such die, hub, or mold, or any part thereof, or permits the same to be used for or in aid of the counterfeiting of any such coins of the United States—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.
18 U.S.C. 485
Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than 5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or in actual use and circulation as money within the United States....

If you read his own comments to the FTC that I linked earlier there is no doubt he's aware that what he does isn't legal or the very least had doubts. Though much like earlier threads here his defense always end up centering on intent. But often times intent doesn't actually matter. Just because one doesn't intend to break the law but then does anyway certainly doesn't absolve one of guilt. Much like ignorantia juris non excusat, being ignorant of law isn't a defense.

And yes they're claimed to be fantasy overstrikes, etc. But based on old threads here Daniel seemed to think they were acceptable as legal tender and wouldn't cause harm if they ended up by mistake being used in commerce because he minted them on legal tender. That implies he has the authority to coin monies for the U.S. does it not? Once the coins have been altered into something else it doesn't matter what the planchet was originally imo. But even being 'fantasy' pieces based on precedence not being marked copy or replica is illegal based on an old FTC decision regarding a similar matter.

The case is linked below
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/f...july_-_december_1978pages_171-273.pdf#page=26

The key piece relating to the matter is where the FTC commission found at the bottom of page 53 'that altering the date wasn't sufficient to avoid a coin being marked as a copy.' And altering the date is exactly what's being done regardless if they're being struck on genuine U.S. coinage or not.

 

Anyone who would drop thousands of dollars without looking up any information on an item would soon be scammed by something else. In your hypothetical with a seller like that and a buyer like that converging on each other whether or not Carr's items exist that buyer will be had.

In this case it does not. Coining money would imply that money was being added to the current amount of available currency. Using the peace dollar as an example it was struck on a peace dollar, therefore no additional currency was actually added to the current supply. Its when new currency that shouldn't be there is added to the supply that you are coining money. If anything currency is really just being destroyed in the same way as a penny on a rail road track or melting down junk silver. In the most technical sense though if that was used as a dollar its the exact same amount as before its just that the currencies appearance was altered.

While its true ignorance of the law will usually not absolve you from being guilty, intent is actually a huge part of the legal system. Numerous laws are written where intent matters. Even when you look at laws for killing someone, the major difference between manslaughter and murder 1 is intent.

We can argue all day long what we wish the law was or how we want it to be but the fact is his work is certainly known and no action has been taken. If someone wants to use the NORFED dollars as an example, a Judge ruled that they must be returned back in August.

 

With all due respect, sir; you haven't "quashed" anything. The above is no more than an assumption that, perhaps, gives far too much credit to the "numismatically" ignorant. Common sense may dictate that research is the logical first step for anyone thinking they may have found a "rare" and/or highly "valuable" coin, but it is, unfortunately, not always the reality. One needs to look no further than eBay for proof that even people capable of using a computer are sometimes too lazy and/or stupid to do so.

Now, if one Googles "Dan Carr fantasy pieces", you're right... the first hit is his website, but we both know this isn't what someone who just discovered one of his copies will search for. If we instead Google what an unfamiliar individual most likely would - "1964-D Peace Dollar" or "1964 -D Dollar" - fantasy information is not "first" but fifth. This, however, may be giving too much credit to such an individual, so let's try the even more obvious and likely "1964 Dollar". Again, not first, but we'll down the page at eighth, and we'll after PCGS' "$10,000 REWARD" page which is second. If just "1964 Dollar" it doesn't show until the last result on the second page. Do you really think that every single person, if ever in such a situation, would make it past the first few sites, especially if they desperately want to believe they've hit the jackpot? Let's forget about the real world for a moment, and think only of what we've seen on this very forum in regards to people ignoring reality in favor of holding onto that big money dream. Between this and the earlier eBay example, the only thing that rightfully should be "quashed" is the belief and /or argument that no one could ever be fooled by his copies, regardless of Mr. Carr's efforts to put the identifiers out there. It only takes one idiot for a possibility to become a reality, and no matter how ridiculously foolish it may seem to us, there are such people out there. We can say all we want that no one is stupid enough to drop any sizable amount of money on a coin without being certain of its authenticity, but the fact is that it does happen. I personally have known more than one over the years who has made unfathomably dumb moves, flushing a fairly substantial amount of money down the toilet, in the name of getting that almighty deal and dreams of easily padding their wallets. It does happen.

Not only do we, as people who care about this hobby, now have Mr. Carr's physical copies to deal with, but also an excellent example of a potentially profitable endeavor, especially considering the modern technology used to produce such things, and the prices they seem to bring. Sooner or later it shouldn't be a surprise to see some enterprising individual with the capabilities, perhaps from overseas, follow his lead, especially if silver stays low, but only on a larger scale (and/or willing to produce known dates as well). The man's own website even shows copies of his copies, so this isn't far fetched. You stated your belief that prices for his copies will increase in the future, which should indicate there could be an even greater draw than there is today to follow his lead. If a quality product was offered at a fraction of the price, they'll have a wider audience and are going to sell, perhaps not to diehards, Carr or not. The copies also set a fine, fine example of what can be accomplished with modern technology, especially if in the "wrong" hands, yet rarely, if ever, is this discussed. His copies, if nothing else, should strike absolute fear into any collector without an in depth knowledge of their collecting area; if he can do it, so can someone else with less noble intentions.

Once the cat is out of the bag, there's simply no going back.

 

Hmmm. I wonder if the "note" collectors bashed Boggs the same way??



All hand drawn and used in trade.

But, whatever. Daniel has a collector base. His works are readily known with even ANACS encapsulating them.

To the untrained eye, sure, soimeo0ne could get fooled but as soon as they marched into a dealer to collect their rewards, there eye's would be opened. Sorry folks, but that's not an authentic Stradivarious.

To me, this is a rather novel idea that doesn't change the base metal value of the coin and its value in the everyday market.

For example, when a quarter dollar coin gets worn down to PO-1 state, isn;t it still an authentic US Quarter? Worth 25 cents at the 7-11?
The same is true of a dime or half dollar or even a dollar coin.

Just because he overstrikes thes US Mint assayed metal rounds with a non-existent date doesn't really mean anything. No different than running a cent through one of those elongated presses except that the elongated press changes the entire design into a collectible token.

Sure, folks get all up in arms about the what if's and how this will destroy the coin collecting market or some poor sap will be ripped off for thousands of dollars being told that they are purchasing a "rare" and valuable coin. But........the truth is, the current market is filled with actual rip offs already such as "First Strike" and "Early Release" and this or that all backed up by MS/PR70 blah blah blah.

Hell, I even had myself a coin that the dealer sold me in my early 20's for $125 that was supposed to escalate in price. I specifically asked for something that had promise. Of course, it never did.

The point being, and it's been shown on these very forums countless times, if you don't do some research with paid professionals AND you're going to sink thousands into it, then you're just a fool. Mama, Daddy, Gramma, Gandpa? None are immune to doing something really stupid.

The other point is that with just a tiny bit of effort in todays Internet Rich Environment (someone did mention "bidiots" as in eBay right?) Daniel Carr has each and every one of his products well documented and thanks to these threads which show up with some regularity on Coin Talks, NCG, and the CU Boards, identifying his work and the impetus behind it could be accomplished by a 5 year old. After all, if someone offers you a super rare coin for a fool's price because they are down on their luck and really need the cash, wouldn't YOU want to validate it's rarity?

Anybody ever buy pots and pans out of the trunk of somebodies car?

There are folks out their that are just plain ignorant. They know it yet do nothing about it. For those folks, there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to protect them regardless of how badly you want to save them from themselves.

I have quite a few of DC's coins. Not everyone, mind you, but all those that I am interested in. IKE's, Kennedy's, Washiongton's and the Good Ole 1964-D Peace Dollar.

 

Well said Lee. Thanks for elaborating on my point!

 

Lazy bum. See the first link below for example. And frankly, while I like many of Daniel Carr's own designs, these fantasy reproductions (or whatever they are called) are quite misleading in my opinion. If you are familiar with US coinage including dates and mint marks, you might easily see that this is not an actual coin. And Carr even emphasizes that they are not.

Would not call this counterfeiting, as he has (AFAIK) never reproduced a coin that actually existed. Now I do not know much about US law with regard to such pieces. However, I wish they were easily distinguishable, either by using a different size or, as somebody suggested before, a "fantasy" mint mark maybe.

FWIW, here is yet another new CT topic about Carr's reproductions: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/my-new-carr.272724/
Some of you may not know this, but @dcarr is a Coin talk member ...

Christian

 

Every discussion about Dan Carr eventually devolves into a heated shouting match about counterfeits. And he laughs all the way to the bank because it serves to draw attention to his product and increase sales.

 

You may have a point there ...

 

If the government suddenly shut him down or forced him to add COPY to his designs. What do you think would happen to the coins currently out there? My guess is they would become more valuable.

 

Wouldn't that infuriate the haters?

 

TS and DC think along similar lines:

 

OT: I like his work and I dont think they are counterfeits. The coin would need to exist first before it can be counterfeited.

 

Some very excellent points on both sides. I'm still on the fence. I clearly understand the "future harm" scenario, as I believe it to be real concern. But, the mintages are so low, the impact would be low. That doesn't help the few that do get fooled/taken by these pieces though. I also understand the fact that with a little research, you'll find these to be fantasy pieces. The 1964 fantasy Peace dollar is the most concerning to me since there we some actually struck in Denver. Whether they were all recaptured by the mint isn't 100% conclusive in my mind. Records show yes, but I question the accuracy and think it's possible the Denver Mint Director was doing a little CYA. But I digress.

I own two DC fantasy pieces: 1965 Peace Dollar & 1916 Barber Half (I also own a couple of his treasure cobs). They are both quite exquisite. Since these dates were never issued by the US Mint, I don't categorize them as counterfeit, but I recognize the confusion they will cause for non collectors/numismatists. If these truly are classified as counterfeit's, than why hasn't the government stepped in and shut it down? I would think any "counterfeiting" no matter how small would be of major concern to the secret service, mints, commerce department, treasury et al.

I wish he had included "fantasy" or "DCopy" somewhere discretely on these fantasy pieces. It could have been done well enough as not to jeopardize the beauty of the piece and protect the uneducated. Or he could have made a small change to the design so they could be easily distinguished from the originals (other than date). The question then becomes, had he done this, would they be as sought after? I suspect the answer is no. And that in itself leads to another question. Were these produced only to gain publicity for his work and thus improve his overall monetary bottom line, without consideration for the harmful impact to the hobby? I have no idea to the true motivation.

Even after typing this, re-reading it, editing it, re-reading it, I'm still torn. I'm looking forward to reading more opinions in this thread.