As they say "the devil is in the details" and "hard cases make bad law."

I agree with Archie, and I think it was correct to notify Numismatic News.

I see that the "Cleopatra River Boat Casino" chips are offered in the classified ad "Gambling/Casino" section of Numismatic News.

I find the seller mostly at fault for not identifying them as "poker" chips. With a name like "Cleopatra River Boat Casino" and no other explanation, an average collector could easily assume they are "casino" chips. And it is a good thing to let the newspaper know about this. (Too bad the price is so low! It sort of lessens the "crime.")

I don't know how much, if at all, Chipco is at fault. In my original posts I referred to three categories that should be prohibited by chip manufacturers. I said at various times::

" I want to restate what I believe the issues are. The goal is to
protect collectors from paying big bucks for a casino chip which is
actually a $1.00-value current poker chip. Maybe some of you could
define this better. Any input is appreciated. I think three types of
new things should be prohibited. The first we would all agree on. The
second, I'd think 90% would agree. The third, I don't know.
Here they are:
(a) No reproductions -- making or attempting to make exact copies of
obsolete or curent casino chips (and maybe obsolete poker chips).
(b) No fantasy chips of defunct casinos; that is chips with (1) real names and
locations of defunct casinos, and (2) any combination of old and new
molds, designs, inlays, logos, amounts, dates, etc.
(c) No fantasy chips with imaginary casino-like names and real locations.
For example, making a chip that says "Arrowhead Casino, Elko, Nevada",
and I am assuming there never has been such a casino there. (I suppose
it is OK to sell chips from planned casinos where the chips were ordered
but never paid for/used. It gets confusing making rules. "The devil is
in the details," as they say.)"

"The way I look at it, [chip manufacturers} have an easy choice: On one hand, make these deceptive chips which will 99 chances out of a 100 be used to fool collectors, or on the other hand, refuse to make such chips and have the customer choose a non-deceptive design."

"(I suppose we can't/shouldn't prohibit them from making fantasy chips with just a name never used for an actual casino (like Cleopatra's Barge or Crazy Legs Casino)"

The Cleopatra case does not cover any of my 3 categories. There is no location on the chips. Say, someone named Archie wanted a set of poker chips made for his Friday night game and had inscribed on them "Archie's Place." No one would want to proscribe those. What if "Brick NJ" was added? I don't know. The "Cleopatra" chips scream out "casino chips" chips, in fact have the word "casino" on them. The "Archie's Place" ones don't. But what if he ordered the chips to say "Archie's Casino" or "Archie's Casino, Brick NJ"?............ Most important, in these rare and difficult cases, is the way the chips are marketed. And in this Cleopatra case the seller clearly was obligated to say they were just poker chips, not casino chips. It was easy to do. He had to know/hope people would order them thinking they were casino chips.