Quote:
Also interesting is that the article states that the use of "first strike" was found to be illegal and is no longer used
This is what is most interesting to me. The link in the article about the 2007 lawsuit took me to a page about raw coins.

So, NGC stopped using the "First Strike" designation, but maybe not only because of the lawsuit. According to the article below,
both NGC and PCGS were being sued over the term, not just NGC. Also, PCGS had previously applied to register the trademark "First Strike", and earlier in 2007, NGC filed to have the trademark withdrawn.
http://www.coin-fraud-news.com/inde...8&Itemid=118I went to
ebay and searched "PCGS first strike" with various years surrounding this lawsuit. There appear to be three types of "First Strike" labels used. In 2006, I saw both "FIRST STRIKE(TM)" and "FIRST STRIKE(R)", suggesting that the trademark had indeed been registered with the USPTO. For 2007, I saw the latter of the two from 2006 (registered), and also the current version in which the space has been removed: "FIRSTSTRIKE(R)".
So, despite the misleading nature of the label, it still lives on, apparently, because it is a registered trademark. Also note that because of PCGS terms regarding this, coins minted before this idea even sprouted can get the label as long as you "Submit the coins in the original unopened shipping box from the U.S. Mint with a postmark date prior to the specified PCGS cutoff date." I found earlier years of PCGS First Strikes with the last of the label types I mentioned. So, whether it has the space and (TM) or (R) should allow one to loosely determine when the coin was encapsulated (I don't know about slab style changes during this period).
I really couldn't care less about First/Early Releases designations, but I agree that NGC needs to make up its mind and I think "First Releases" is the most appropriate.
In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024