-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
THIS is a TRK chip (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter FDLmold
- Start date
#teamcurly
These look like
When you’re 5. Crinkle fries are like Dino nuggets. Shape doesn’t change taste. Steak fries and crinkle fries are too mealy. I like shoestring fries the best. Then curly fries
RivieraDanny
Royal Flush
Too lazy to cite or remove watermark
Clearly chips are not the only things we get excited over. Love you guys/gals lol
Last edited:
You guys are funny, this thread is the right kind of pcf drama.
Also, welcome @ChipGuide ! Great start to your pcf adventure
Also, welcome @ChipGuide ! Great start to your pcf adventure
What’s with all the curly fry love - they are the worst. I’d rather have no fries, than curly fries. Extra greasy, mostly soggy, with that lame batter -
The crinkle in the crinkle fries adds extra crispness, dimension, and texture. Dino nuggets - what ev’s
Shoe String are good though, second only to crinkle.
RagahRagah
Flush
You're still our reigning champion of being the pot calling the kettle black on everything.
FordPickup92
Royal Flush
FordPickup92
Royal Flush
Yup. Just found that out about 10 minutes ago. Consider me surprised.
yup! always loved these 1/4 pie $1s. One of the only TRK house molds AFAIK
Yup!!!! Most people don't know that. One of the very few TRK house molds, if not the ONLY one
Actually GN mold was made both TRK and Burt Co. I have a post somewhere in PCF land that shows the order cards. And stay away from them 1/4 pies.
I take it back. Burt not Paulson made most of the G-N chips. This chip was from the 50s, way before Paulson even thought about existing.
Like TRK, Burt didn't make too many house molds either. Cool chips.
I also didn't know this and always assumed they weren't Paulson chips... thanks for sharing the info prerequisite to all the drama that ensued. Appreciate that!
I like you, sir.The crinkle in the crinkle fries adds extra crispness, dimension, and texture. Dino nuggets - what ev’s
Never mind.Shoe String are good though, second only to crinkle.
This thread was enlightening, humorous and needed today, at least for me.
As for the best fries ... The Dixie Chicken Tijuana Fries with ranch dressing take the crown...especially with a cold beer and some dominoes for '42'
As for the best fries ... The Dixie Chicken Tijuana Fries with ranch dressing take the crown...especially with a cold beer and some dominoes for '42'
This thread was enlightening, humorous and needed today, at least for me.
As for the best fries ... The Dixie Chicken Tijuana Fries with ranch dressing take the crown...especially with a cold beer and some dominoes for '42'
practice safe fries....use a condiment
ekricket
Royal Flush
There’s some interesting work going on at the Supreme Court regarding this issue. Here’s a link to some recent activity, and some cases being looked at soon are very relevant.
https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-cases-2021/
Here’s a key point from the Warhol case, simply altering a photo does not make it yours. Warhol took someone’s photo of Prince and altered it significantly.
The court ruled that it was not transformative, it was still the original owners work, even though it had been cropped, colors changed, lines and other figures added, the perspective had been shifted and elements removed from the original photo.
That still wasn’t enough to render it a new piece of art or work.
From the article
“First, it provided needed guidance on how to analyze what constitutes a transformative use as opposed to a derivative use (falling under the derivative work right). This is a crucial clarification that corrects case law and commentary that have increasingly blurred the line between transformative use and derivative works in recent years as to nearly eliminate a copyright owner’s exclusive right to prepare derivative works. The court clearly sought to move away from the broad notions of transformativeness that it recognized have come to skew fair use analyses. Proposing a more rational dividing line for evaluating whether a work is sufficiently transformative or simply derivative, the Second Circuit confirmed that to be transformative enough to qualify as a fair use a secondary work must be “fundamentally different and new” and embody an “entirely different artistic purpose” so that it “stands apart from the raw material.””
Pretty sure taking someones photo and making it still look the same as their photo doesn’t give you any copyright privileges.
And if you continue to make fraudulent claims it will only dilute what few legitimate claims you might have and open you up to fraud and misuse of legitimately copyrighted material.
https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-cases-2021/
Here’s a key point from the Warhol case, simply altering a photo does not make it yours. Warhol took someone’s photo of Prince and altered it significantly.
The court ruled that it was not transformative, it was still the original owners work, even though it had been cropped, colors changed, lines and other figures added, the perspective had been shifted and elements removed from the original photo.
That still wasn’t enough to render it a new piece of art or work.
From the article
“First, it provided needed guidance on how to analyze what constitutes a transformative use as opposed to a derivative use (falling under the derivative work right). This is a crucial clarification that corrects case law and commentary that have increasingly blurred the line between transformative use and derivative works in recent years as to nearly eliminate a copyright owner’s exclusive right to prepare derivative works. The court clearly sought to move away from the broad notions of transformativeness that it recognized have come to skew fair use analyses. Proposing a more rational dividing line for evaluating whether a work is sufficiently transformative or simply derivative, the Second Circuit confirmed that to be transformative enough to qualify as a fair use a secondary work must be “fundamentally different and new” and embody an “entirely different artistic purpose” so that it “stands apart from the raw material.””
Pretty sure taking someones photo and making it still look the same as their photo doesn’t give you any copyright privileges.
And if you continue to make fraudulent claims it will only dilute what few legitimate claims you might have and open you up to fraud and misuse of legitimately copyrighted material.
coolcustomer123
3 of a Kind
http://www.thechipboard.com/index.cgi/page/1/md/read/id/1710500/sbj/counterfeit-chips/
Stolen pics posted on TCB lol
Stolen pics posted on TCB lol
AfterTheFact
4 of a Kind
Wonder who… ummmm
I've tried signing up for TCB four times. Between their ancient technology and members (who still transact via check), idk if this is a sure thing on their end.
Also, "Concerned Collector" as a username is... special.
bergs
Royal Flush
That guy should go back to his dilipadated 1988 dial-up I-found-it-on-askjeeves bulletin board software thermal printing HTML 0.5 Q&A 4.0 database driven Netscape Navigator v0.8 Norton Utilities maintained hosted-in-the-basement website and fuck straight off.
He’s not a friend to the community here. I’ve got half a mind to find a way to rip a copy of every picture they have on that site and create a new site that consists just of their pictures and giant dongs that bounce around the screen as you scroll. I’ll call it the thechipdongboard.com and every user account has to register from the eatmynuts.org domain.
He’s not a friend to the community here. I’ve got half a mind to find a way to rip a copy of every picture they have on that site and create a new site that consists just of their pictures and giant dongs that bounce around the screen as you scroll. I’ll call it the thechipdongboard.com and every user account has to register from the eatmynuts.org domain.
coolcustomer123
3 of a Kind
Don't hold back. Let it ALL out.
links_slayer
4 of a Kind
in for a lifetime membership
AlbinoDragon
Flush
"Concerned Collector" has an email of "noemail@gmail.com". That alone seems suspicious, especially in a group that is adamant about not hiding behind usernames particularly on TCB. 
I wanted nothing to do with the the club over a decade ago and want even less now. BS like this keeps chip collectors away.
[EDIT - I took the three minutes and read the message chain at TCB. I'm sorry I won't get that time back, but it re-confirmed some of what I have felt about the club, that it's an echo chamber to a degree and anything "new" like this is a dire threat to the collector community. It's like they believe these are being made specifically to deceive new collectors.]
I wanted nothing to do with the the club over a decade ago and want even less now. BS like this keeps chip collectors away.
[EDIT - I took the three minutes and read the message chain at TCB. I'm sorry I won't get that time back, but it re-confirmed some of what I have felt about the club, that it's an echo chamber to a degree and anything "new" like this is a dire threat to the collector community. It's like they believe these are being made specifically to deceive new collectors.]
Last edited:
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.
Similar threads
