Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dcarr, post: 2965637, member: 4781&quot;]We are at the same point of contention as always. There is a distinction between striking a known coin type on a virgin blank (and deceptively marketing it) versus over-striking (altering) an existing genuine coin for novelty purposes. You may dismiss that distinction, but it still exists nonetheless.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Committee was fully aware of the altering of genuine coins to add fantasy elements, and the only Committee statement regarding the alteration of US Coins was: &quot;<i>By contrast, the federal statute prohibiting the alteration of U.S. coins requires fraudulent intent. </i><a href="https://api.fdsys.gov/link?collection=uscode&amp;title=18&amp;year=mostrecent&amp;section=331&amp;type=usc&amp;link-type=html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://api.fdsys.gov/link?collection=uscode&amp;title=18&amp;year=mostrecent&amp;section=331&amp;type=usc&amp;link-type=html" rel="nofollow"><i>18 U.S.C. 331</i></a><i>. Accordingly, the Commission finds no grounds to adopt a rule banning fantasy coins.&quot; </i>As I stated previously, this indicates that altering US coins is ok if not done with fraudulent intent. The Committee did not indicate that a genuine coin with a counter-stamp, for example, must be marked &quot;COPY&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>A genuine coin that is altered to have fantasy elements is not a copy of an &quot;original numismatic item&quot;. The &quot;Carr&quot; over-strike &quot;1964-D&quot; Peace dollars have been out for 8 years now. Based on market acceptance, resale prices, and high-level collectors acquiring them, they have achieved the status of an &quot;original numismatic item&quot; in their own right. Other (non-Carr) &quot;1964&quot; Peace dollars have not achieved any sort of brand recognition.[/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