Quote:
I'd like to see one. They are extremely rare. To say you've seen "plenty" of counterfeits slabbed by PCGS as genuine is hard to believe.
Quote:I have only heard of a hand full of counterfeits that have been slabbed by any legit
TPG. Usually they are not even known to be counterfeit until after the fact when some specialist actually brings the counterfeits into the light. I have never seen any counterfeits in a real
TPG holder that wouldn't fool even most experienced collectors and dealers alike
They are unusual to begin with, but then again so is collecting counterfeits. I suppose that my "plenty of" (within the context of being a counterfeit collector) is relative to that. :-)
Where I've seen a few fake
Trade dollars and about a dozen 1896/1900/1902 Micro-O Morgans in PCGS slabs (the latter, formally "recalled," as it were), I've also seen PCGS mistakes in world coins. swamperbob has a bunch of world coin mistake photos in his threads I'm sure he can share.
My point is that even TPGs are human and make mistakes. The average submission is only looked at by a grader for a relative few moments, and it's a constant game of cat and mouse.
Quote:
To clarify: While it can technically be construed as legal to sell unmarked counterfeits if you are in no way associated with the manufacture or importation of same, The Hobby Protection Act states, "...introduction into or distribution in commerce is illegal", making the semantics subject to potential judicial wrangling.
...
...The House of Representatives bill, HR-5977...
Aye, the crux of the matter more has to do with the clause directly before that which mentions two classes: manufacturers and importers. The HPA was originally written with the intention to stop the production of unmarked fake coins on domestic soil and prevent importing them from abroad, not to get collectors in trouble. :-)
Where I
sincerely love and encourage the idea of expanding the HPA, I actually find it difficult to support HR-5977 as it's currently written as it
could put
a large number of collectors in serious trouble.
The first example that comes to mind is that without some fine-tuning, one could be prosecuted for selling contemporary counterfeits without marking them "COPY," which would seriously damage established numismatic value for legitimate numismatic items. :-(
Another portion of the Act, as written, that makes me exceedingly worried is:
Quote:
It shall be a violation of subsection (a) or (b) for a person to provide substantial assistance or support to any manufacturer, importer, or seller if that person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the manufacturer, importer, or seller is engaged in any act or practice that violates subsection (a) or (b)
"Consciously avoids knowing" is an abusable oxymoron and is a phrase that has no place in law, period. In court you'd have to prove that someone *knows* that they *don't know* something that they *know.*

It needs to be re-written more elegantly without the potential for serious legal tomfoolery.
In truth, everything that this Act tries to "tighten up on" is already covered in Federal laws concerning fraud. If you represent that a coin is genuine when you know it's fake, and you sell it as a genuine item, you're punishable under the law. Period. As the Act is currently written it would only add unnecessary redundancy and open up honest people to criminal charges. :-(