Hey G,
I understand your position and meaning concerning the die, well maybe not as much as Niblet.
Believe me, I have my concerns as well, and from what I�ve gathered on this forum, Gahr understood the regulations just as well as other companies. Unrelated to the marks we�re discussing, it seems they might have done something a little differently as well. But that doesn�t surprise me either, because there�s nothing in the regulation that I know of stating they can�t. Does that make it wrong and who�s to say?
They�re not the lone ranger here; it�s a very well known fact that some German companies in the past took advantage of the system, maybe because there wasn�t a law in place to stop them or maybe the profit was too great for them to pass up. I don�t know for sure why, but these companies with highly skilled artisans produced items that resembled antiques or copied known originals and did it extremely well. From what I�m told, German companies to this day copy Gahr jewelry? My point is; If someone wanted this Gahr connector copied, faked, whatever, they didn�t have to look very far to have it done up right. But on the other hand, it was just as easy for Gahr to have marked this item in the traditional manner. But remember also, just because a company�s mark is on an item, doesn�t necessarily mean they made it or marked it!
I as well use to fall into this category so I understand, but some including you,
have a preconceived notion that Germany had a controlling or official regulating body,(Assay office). Propagated no doubt due to strict UK hallmarking laws. But in fact, there was no official regulating body to control and regulate marking. So, if there was no official control and it was completely left up to the individual companies with a registered trademark to mark their own wares, then who�s to say one�s interpretation of the law is wrong? Especially if there�s no law that states they can�t. Again, the important part is, was the intent of the law followed. Hopefully the silver aging test will give us the answers we ask! Regards
PS, Jim m had a very profound and interesting statement about marks and the HR during this debate that I would like to discuss, but will do that in the HR ring forum. Regards,
