Removing inlays from Paulsons (1 Viewer)

tigon

Straight
Joined
Nov 4, 2014
Messages
831
Reaction score
223
Location
Canada
I thought this was pretty interesting and might be worth a try with some my ES $1s at some point. Is this the method Gear uses to remove labels too? Does the hot water damage the texture of the chip and can it cause warping?

https://web.archive.org/web/2010060...dun-paulson-how-to-remove-inlay-from-paulson/

In the Chiptalk thread about it the former owner/manager of BCC raised some interesting concerns:

Being a chip manufacturer this thread really disturbs me. It basically disregards copyrights and trademarks, and is a how to for not just removing inlays but counterfeiting chips.

I do not agree with censorship, even though I would like to see this thread go away; but I do believe in ethics and a responsibility to promote doing what is right, legally and morally.

Mike Endy
Blue Chip Co.

I agree that it can be construed as a guide for chip counterfeiting, but putting aside the usage of copyrighted images and just focusing on the removing inlays and replacing them with something else, isn't the first sale doctrine applicable here?
 
Last edited:
I tried this with a few Paulson chips. You will destroy some, so you need to know that going into it. My results varied, some were not tough to remove and some were downright impossible. It is a risk. Heating the chips did not affect them at all in my experience with texture or warping.

Not worth the trouble in my opinion. You will spend an incredible amount of time with this process and if your time is valuable to you, you are better off getting custom CPC's done.
 
I wonder if you can mill the label off like using a drill bit when resurfacing.
 
I thought this was pretty interesting and might be worth a try with some my ES $1s at some point. Is this the method Gear uses to remove labels too? Does the hot water damage the texture of the chip and can it cause warping?

https://web.archive.org/web/2010060...dun-paulson-how-to-remove-inlay-from-paulson/

In the Chiptalk thread about it the former owner/manager of BCC raised some interesting concerns:



I agree that it can be construed as a guide for chip counterfeiting, but putting aside the usage of copyrighted images and just focusing on the removing inlays and replacing them with something else, isn't the first sale doctrine applicable here?

Just to chime in on the legality of it... there's absolutely nothing wrong with what's going on here, and I'm glad the thread was never censored. You could make a really weak point that this info could assist a counterfeiter, but that would be some pretty aggressive censorship to make that leap.

And as far as the First Sale Doctrine, that actually protects the consumer (chip buyer in this case) and allows them the right to resell or display their purchased chips, as long as those chips were purchased legally from the copyright holder.

But in practical, real life terms... what's likely really going on is someone is removing some artwork (nothing wrong here), reusing Paulson trademarked chips (nothing wrong here unless they resell them), and possibly taking someone's art from the internet and putting them on the blanks (technically copyright infringement, but if you aren't selling them, the damages are so minimal that it's essentially a non-issue).

If we're talking about home use and not reselling, there's no real legal issue with anything going on here. Of course, it's always nice to compensate artists if you use their work, even if it's just in your home.

(IANAL this is not legal advice...)
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom