Have Chinese cards mold replica sets gone too far? (22 Viewers)

[Nanook]

......You think it’s cool we use THIS forum to facilitate a bunch of fake Paulson hat and cane mold chips?

Paulson WILL crack down on fake hat and cane mold sellers, or it will abandon the mold completely..........The difference, is that Paulson currently will defend its trademark, it should, penalties will be incurred to any parties violating the trademark. It’s pretty cut and dry.

Idk, GPI revenue last yr 26 million, Rolex =13 Billion. Rolex has had basically 0 luck cracking down on replica watches. My guess is that the replica Rolex business is considerably bigger than the entire GPI business. How much money can GPI actually devote to defending itself from Tina THC? Whatever that amount would be, it will be considerably less than Rolex spends to defend itself from counterfeit watches.

It isn't against the law to own a replica watch, but is against the law to sell them and import them for sale. I am no expert, but I would imagine the laws would be similar for replica Casino chips. Assuming that is the case, if someone in China (Tina or someone else) decides to manufacture fake THC''s on a ceramic blank it is going to be super tough to stop that.

 

[Nanook]

However, plenty of folks here complain about the slipperiness of CMs, but these RHCs my buddy picked up for me last weekend slide around worse than dice chips.
View attachment 1034480

those RHC's with the giant inlay don't have much surface area with clay only to contact one another. This is one of the many reasons to dislike the giant inlay

Exactly. Worn RHC and new CM aren't that far off in feel.

Disagree in general + the look of worn ceramics is just terrible. Have you ever played at a cardroom or Casino with well worn Chipco's? After a while, basically all the art disappeared and you are left with this white(ish) ceramic material.

 

[Johnblue]

Idk, GPI revenue last yr 26 million, Rolex =13 Billion. Rolex has had basically 0 luck cracking down on replica watches. My guess is that the replica Rolex business is considerably bigger than the entire GPI business. How much money can GPI actually devote to defending itself from Tina THC? Whatever that amount would be, it will be considerably less than Rolex spends to defend itself from counterfeit watches.

It isn't against the law to own a replica watch, but is against the law to sell them and import them for sale. I am no expert, but I would imagine the laws would be similar for replica Casino chips. Assuming that is the case, if someone in China (Tina or someone else) decides to manufacture fake THC''s on a ceramic blank it is going to be super tough to stop that.

i know a bit about fake rolexs, theres a website. RWI its a forum and you can kinda figure out whats going on. the chinese manuafactures of the good fake watches use middlemen, theres are not tons of them, there seem to be like 10 people, like tina who speak and live in china with direct connects at the factories. the factories are illigal in china, they get shut down or have to move regularly. the middlemen put up websites, they get taken down quickly, they put up new ones. people work in the shadows to get the merchandise into countries where there are buyers... most of the sales are done privately through email, and theres always a chance of not getting what you paid for.

your claim that rolex has 0 luck cracking down doesnt hold water, try selling a fake one on eBay.. talk to some families in china who go to jail for life.

PCF would be a sitting duck.

you really think its worth kicking off this type scrutiny and relationship with paulson, for the difference between a hat and cane and card pips mold on 30c chips?

my lord, do a spade and a golfclub, or skull and bones, or fricking anything other than copy the main trademark of the main company in the community.

 

[upNdown]

you really think its worth kicking off this type scrutiny and relationship with paulson, for the difference between a hat and cane and card pips mold on 30c chips?

What relationship with Paulson? GPI freaking hates us. People on this site have gamed the system at least a half-dozen times to get them to make chips for us, one of which resulted in the Rio having to pull a WSOP set. Another time we made ceramic tributes that so closely mirrored a major casino’s live Bud Jones chips that apparently legal action was threatened. And these are only the ones I know about.
There is no relationship with Paulson.
I agree that nobody should be making hat and cane knockoffs, not for any love lost for Paulson but just because it isn’t cool and it’s bad for the hobby.

 

[grantc54]

Disagree in general + the look of worn ceramics is just terrible. Have you ever played at a cardroom or Casino with well worn Chipco's? After a while, basically all the art disappeared and you are left with this white(ish) ceramic material.

To clarify, I am saying very worn RHC seem more similar to plastic or ceramics in the case of slipperiness. New CMs and well played RHCs would be more similar to new CMs and new RHCs. And agree worn ceramics look like crap.

 

[grantc54]

Very much this:

you really think its worth kicking off this type scrutiny and relationship with paulson, for the difference between a hat and cane and card pips mold on 30c chips?

I just don't get the point of replicating RHCs unless you are trying to decieve someone. Go with a new mold.

 

[Colquhoun]

Have you ever played at a cardroom or Casino with well worn Chipco's? After a while, basically all the art disappeared and you are left with this white(ish) ceramic material.

Yes, worn Chipco's look awful.
Time will tell on CM chips, but other ceramics in a home game setting have little chance of showing nearly that kind of wear.

 

[SiouxperStack]

i know a bit about fake rolexs, theres a website. RWI its a forum and you can kinda figure out whats going on. the chinese manuafactures of the good fake watches use middlemen, theres are not tons of them, there seem to be like 10 people, like tina who speak and live in china with direct connects at the factories. the factories are illigal in china, they get shut down or have to move regularly. the middlemen put up websites, they get taken down quickly, they put up new ones. people work in the shadows to get the merchandise into countries where there are buyers... most of the sales are done privately through email, and theres always a chance of not getting what you paid for.

your claim that rolex has 0 luck cracking down doesnt hold water, try selling a fake one on eBay.. talk to some families in china who go to jail for life.

PCF would be a sitting duck.

you really think its worth kicking off this type scrutiny and relationship with paulson, for the difference between a hat and cane and card pips mold on 30c chips?

my lord, do a spade and a golfclub, or skull and bones, or fricking anything other than copy the main trademark of the main company in the community.

What does GPI think about NAGBs?

 

[Nanook]

......theres a website. RWI .....

I'm aware

your claim that rolex has 0 luck cracking down doesnt hold water, try selling a fake one on eBay.. talk to some families in china who go to jail for life.

Really, you have?
This is a joke right? The Chinese government puts on a fake show for the US and others that they actually care. No one actually goes to jail. They have no intellectual property rights laws that are enforced.

PCF would be a sitting duck.

Not that it matters, but why is it that PCF gets shut down/ is a sitting duck, but sites like RWI, RWG, repgeek etc & others continue to operate unabated in a business that is literally 500x the size of casino chips?

I respectfully disagree

you really think its worth kicking off this type scrutiny and relationship with paulson, for the difference between a hat and cane and card pips mold on 30c chips?

No I do not. That wasn't my point at all. My point was that if Rolex can't stop it, then GPI won't be able to stop it either.

Some evidence to super my position:

A little Google search of:

"How big is the fake watch market?"
Returns this:

In fact, black market threat intelligence provider Havocscope estimates that 40 million counterfeit watches are sold globally each year, the net profit of which is roughly $1 billion.

Another Google search:
"How many Rolex watches are sold each year"
Returns:
Although Rolex doesn't announce how many watches they make in a year, the most widely acceptable number of watches they produce is roughly 1,000,000 annually.Mar 15, 2022

You can do more Google searches and find out that Rolex is by far the #1 brand watch that gets counterfeited so conservatively 20 fake watches are made/sold for every real one.

Again, I stand by what I said. Whatever efforts Rolex efforts is making to stop counterfeiting isn't doing much good if 20+ fakes are made for every genuine one.

 

[Johnblue]

I'm aware


Really, you have?
This is a joke right? The Chinese government puts on a fake show for the US and others that they actually care. No one actually goes to jail. They have no intellectual property rights laws that are enforced.



Not that it matters, but why is it that PCF gets shut down/ is a sitting duck, but sites like RWI, RWG, repgeek etc & others continue to operate unabated in a business that is literally 500x the size of casino chips?

I respectfully disagree


No I do not. That wasn't my point at all. My point was that if Rolex can't stop it, then GPI won't be able to stop it either.

Some evidence to super my position:

A little Google search of:

"How big is the fake watch market?"
Returns this:

In fact, black market threat intelligence provider Havocscope estimates that 40 million counterfeit watches are sold globally each year, the net profit of which is roughly $1 billion.

Another Google search:
"How many Rolex watches are sold each year"
Returns:
Although Rolex doesn't announce how many watches they make in a year, the most widely acceptable number of watches they produce is roughly 1,000,000 annually.Mar 15, 2022

You can do more Google searches and find out that Rolex is by far the #1 brand watch that gets counterfeited so conservatively 20 fake watches are made/sold for every real one.

Again, I stand by what I said. Whatever efforts Rolex efforts is making to stop counterfeiting isn't doing much good if 20+ fakes are made for every genuine one.

From the people at RWI, that report from China, seems like China takes it pretty serious, (obviously they can’t stop it) but what they say over there, is that the watchmakers they deal with almost have to have mobile rigs because they have to change locations so often from getting run out of business.

I think Rolex, does what they can, and so would Paulson.

I am pretty sure everything at RWI is done under anonymity, especially the folks running the site, and I doubt that’s an American person running that forum, if it is, it’s done from a billion VPNs with the knowledge they could get a knock on the door if thier identity is found out.

Much different than here, who deals with none of that drama.

It would take Paulson literally 1 minute to figure out an American human to give a hard time to.

 

[Okku]

 

[Mojo1312]

To lighten things up. Thailand was a counterfeit paradise for sailors in the eighties. I purchased dozens of cassettes of my favorite bands and musicians, The Doors, Fleetwood Mac, Bob Dylan, etc. Unlike here in the U.S., you didn't have to worry about a greatest hits album missing your favorite song.

Shortly after we left port, word spread around the ship that our berths were going to be raided. As fate would have it, I along with four others got summoned to the masters at arms locker to give a hand in moving stuff from point a to point b, point a being the masters at arms locker.

I show up second in line. I am looking directly in front of me and notice the combination padlock on the door. I immediately recognize that I am safe from any search if I can get the combination to the lock. I waited for the Master at Arms officer to turn his back to work the lock before casually shifting my position to get a better view.

Fairly confident that I had the numbers, I went back that night. Second attempt, Bingo! the lock pops open! I close the lock and return with a brand new sea bag containing the counterfeit goods I bought in Thailand, entered the sequence of numbers to the lock, opened the door to the cage, walked inside and dropped the sea bag on the floor near the rear corner wall.

Two months later when we returned stateside, my bag was where I had left it, undisturbed.

 

[grantc54]

Wasn't a letter received for the BW chips causing them to be sanitized on the site? Wouldn't a RHC CM chip trigger a smiliar response?

I only vaguely remember something with this. I could be wrong.

 

[BGinGA]

I was at the old ASM a long long time ago (2008?) and got a brief tour from JimB when I picked up my original Truman’s House chips and he had TH&C molds installed in a press.

Interesting.

Not really, considering that the Burt Co. (original owner of the ASM assets) manufactured the first Top Hat & Cane mold chips for Christy & Jones Co. (and later for Paulson, after the molds were purchased from C&J).

 

[BGinGA]

Wasn't a letter received for the BW chips causing them to be sanitized on the site? Wouldn't a RHC CM chip trigger a smiliar response?

I only vaguely remember something with this. I could be wrong.

Several people and companies received C&D letters and related investigative inquiries from the Borgata's legal team.

 

[davislane]

Wouldn't a RHC CM chip trigger a smiliar response?

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

View attachment 1034661

I don't think anyone here is claiming Paulson can stop Tina. I believe the issue is what if Paulson sends a C&D letter to Tommy. I don't know Tommy well at all, but I suspect he's not bankrolled to take on a legal battle with Paulson, nor would he be willing to over Tina chips even if he had the money. I Suspect if they asked him to stop trading them here on PCF that he would comply, ask all of us to comply, and put in new rules to ensure compliance.

 

[davislane]

I don't think anyone here is claiming Paulson can stop Tina. I believe the issue is what if Paulson sends a C&D letter to Tommy. I don't know Tommy well at all, but I suspect he's not bankrolled to take on a legal battle with Paulson, nor would he be willing to over Tina chips even if he had the money. I Suspect if they asked him to stop trading them here on PCF that he would comply, ask all of us to comply, and put in new rules to ensure compliance.

paulson has bigger problems than cards mold. they should/would have more of an issue with nagb chips than replica ceramics. Look at what happened with ESST and Paulson having to remake the WSOP chips because of it. Despite all this, chips keep hitting classifieds.

Now, individual casinos whose chips are being "replicated" onto ceramics, they definitely could have a problem as it could be a perceived threat to security. What they decide to do we will know in due course. Thankfully Aria hasnt caught wind of all the tribute or if they have dont give a crap about it.

 

[ekricket]

Part of IP protection is that once you are aware of fakes you have to do something about it. If you don’t do anything then you are accepting it and others can start encroaching. So if you care about your IP you have to do something about it. There’s no measure of if it’s too small to care or too big to do anything about. You have to do something to show you value your IP.

 

[aggie]

NAGBs are not the problem. They are a handful of obsolete/decommissioned sets that bypassed GPIs self-administered vetting process, and get sold and re-sold in some weird niche hobby alongside tens of thousands of other authentic Paulson sets. Key word: Authentic. If GPI is angry or embarrassed about them, what do you expect them to do? Sue themselves for getting duped into making them?

Point being, how GPI handles their own obsolete chips has absolutely nothing to do with how they'd handle a 3rd party publicly brokering fakes replicas tributes honorary discs of GPI's approved designs and trademarked molds.

There is another side to this, though. It seems high-quality ceramic chips printed on-demand for the public should seemingly encourage casinos to stick with compressed clay (or at least a more complex manufacturing model like RFID). Imagine being a casino running ceramics or plastics right now (Golden Nugget $1s or many Texas Cardhouses?) and seeing these Cards Molds show up at your cage. All-Team meeting, stat.

I started this thread asking if Cards Mold replicas had gone too far. My "updated" personal belief is that when a photo can fool someone, it's gone too far. Not because of internet likes or collector value, but because that's when the real risk of real fraud occurs. As someone else stated, why continue working to make them as close to the original if not for that reason?

 

[Meddler2]

Not really, considering that the Burt Co. (original owner of the ASM assets) manufactured the first Top Hat & Cane mold chips for Christy & Jones Co. (and later for Paulson, after the molds were purchased from C&J).

"he had TH&C molds installed in a press."
This is the interesting aspect.

 

[Colquhoun]

… because that's when the real risk of real fraud occurs. As someone else stated, why continue working to make them as close to the original if not for that reason?

To be clear, you’re suggesting that someone that gets them as close as possible to the original is solely motivated to do so out of a desire to commit fraud?

 

[aggie]

To be clear, you’re suggesting that someone that gets them as close as possible to the original is solely motivated to do so out of a desire to commit fraud?

Yes. Replicating Paulson's mold without their approval is, in and of itself, fraud. Full stop.

Can that (semi-ethically?) be overlooked because there is no clear victim? I can see how one might make that case, especially if they're used only in a private setting like a home game. But why else would someone continue to redraw the line and press for a more "believable" replica, to then resell publicly?


edit: I will add that I stated, "the real risk of real fraud" not "the sole motivation is fraud" -- a very clear "gotcha" word salad -- but I'm still willing to play along.

 

[Colquhoun]

Yes. Replicating Paulson's mold without their approval is, in and of itself, fraud. Full stop.

Can that (semi-ethically?) be overlooked because there is no clear victim? I can see how one might make that case, especially if they're used only in a private setting like a home game. But why else would someone continue to redraw the line and press for a more

"believable" replica, to then resell publicly?


edit: I will add that I stated, "the real risk of real fraud" not "the sole motivation is fraud" -- a very clear "gotcha" word salad -- but I'm still willing to play along.

I wasn’t suggesting that making a copy of an intellectual property wasnt fraudulent, I was asking if you were suggesting that the owner of the chips were only interested in fraudulently representing them as original (for sale, etc.)
I wasn’t trying to twist your words when I said “sole motivation”, I was trying to clarify your question about why someone would want to make them as close as possible if not for “that reason”, which I understood being fraud.

I guess you were talking about the person making the chips, I was referring to the person buying them. I see the manufacturer of copies as making the fraudulent act, and owning them as an ethical one.

 

[aggie]

I guess you were talking about the person making the chips, I was referring to the person buying them. I see the manufacturer and seller of copies as making the fraudulent act, and owning them as an ethical one.

Good distinction, and one I can 100% get behind (with one small adjustment above).

Again (and again), I'm not here to judge or gatekeep or play the martyr. As I said in Post #1, I get it and actually really love some of the sets that have come out -- the PNY and Bellagio, in particular -- a great deal of design and care clearly went into those.

I still just continue to ask, "When is too far?" to which it seems the tipping point for most is when the mold changes. Just because I personally believe the line may be crossed before then doesn't mean it's my job to police what others do with their time and money. But it's clearly worthy of a discussion, as evidenced by 23+ pages of input.

 

[ekricket]

I just had some dollars printed in China that look pretty good. Anyone want to sell me your cards mold sets for them?
You can tell all your friends they are real and I’ll give you extras. Your wallet will be bulging and you will impress your workmates every time you buy something in front of them. You can just take a $1 out and use it to light your cigarettes, it’s a hoot at parties.
Fake money is just as impressive as real money.

 

[ChipEnvy]

So milling chips and putting new casino labels on them is awesome… and edge conditioning is a miracle bringing chips back to life! But a ceramic chip that has a clay chip mold is a big deal and going to hurt the collecting community?

We have already crossed every line there is, The point where this discussion would have been relevant is probably five or six years ago. Now, this is tiny in comparison to other issues this forum celebrates. Looking at you label replacement, milling, edge conditioning and flattening chips.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

So milling chips and putting new casino labels on them is awesome… and edge conditioning is a miracle bringing chips back to life! But a ceramic chip that has a clay chip mold is a big deal and going to hurt the collecting community?

We have already crossed every line there is, The point where this discussion would have been relevant is probably five or six years ago. Now, this is tiny in comparison to other issues this forum celebrates. Looking at you label replacement, milling, edge conditioning and flattening chips.

Honest question from a noobie, how are you relating edge conditioning and the flattening of chips to creating copies of molds? I can't relate the two, restoration vs recreation?

 

[aggie]

So milling chips and putting new casino labels on them is awesome… and edge conditioning is a miracle bringing chips back to life! But a ceramic chip that has a clay chip mold is a big deal and going to hurt the collecting community?

We have already crossed every line there is, The point where this discussion would have been relevant is probably five or six years ago. Now, this is tiny in comparison to other issues this forum celebrates. Looking at you label replacement, milling, edge conditioning and flattening chips.

It's a good point, but I don't see how stealing a company's IP for the purpose of recreating & reselling is "tiny" compared to restoring or repurposing chips that already exist. Does relabeling create a similar grey area? Absolutely. But can we not walk and chew gum at the same time? Or is everything whataboutism at this point?

 

[aggie]

We have already crossed every line there is

I put some more thought into this comment, and as an infant in this hobby, I realize I shouldn’t have dismissed it so quickly.

Many of y’all have been around long enough to experience the bastardization of chip collecting from many angles that I simply accepted upon joining. I own some relabeled chips and justify them because they fill voids for chips in a set that never actually existed. But in a way, I guess I’m complicit in simply chasing what I want without regard for the hobby.

That said, I guess the point of the thread keeps getting overlooked. The purpose isn’t to judge or rank grievances in our community, rather to discuss if there’s a point in replicas where too far is too far ... a line those in favor of replicas continue to avoid.

The response, “Six years ago was too far” is valid and reasoned, but probably shouldn’t serve as justification for taking things even further. In other words, we don't piss on the couch just because someone else crapped on the rug.