All banknotes to have a 2D barcode?

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 20:28:25 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

Apparently PDF417 can store 500 characters per square inch (I'm not an
expert in this area, though)

And when it's tattered and ripped?

PDF417 uses Solomon Reed error correction of flexible size, so a few
damaged bits would be OK. Not that I see much point in the exercise
unless we all have online readers that are able to detect stolen or
duplicate bar codes at the point we receive the money.

--
Cynic

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 18:43:39 +0100, Cynic wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 20:28:25 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

Apparently PDF417 can store 500 characters per square inch (I'm not an
expert in this area, though)

And when it's tattered and ripped?

PDF417 uses Solomon Reed error correction of flexible size, so a few
damaged bits would be OK. Not that I see much point in the exercise
unless we all have online readers that are able to detect stolen or
duplicate bar codes at the point we receive the money.

Perhaps the shops would. I've seen loads (ok ONE) shop with a UV banknote tester.

--
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com

An American, a German and a Japanese guy are golfing one day and, at the 3rd hole, they hear a phone ring. The American excuses himself, puts his left thumb to his ear, his left baby finger to his mouth and proceeds to have a telephone conversation.
When he is done, he looks at the other two and says "Oh, that's the latest American technology in cell phones. I have a chip in my thumb and one in my baby finger and the antenna is in my hat. Great stuff eh?"
They continue golfing until the 9th hole when, again, they hear a phone ring. The German tilts his head to one side and proceeds to have a conversation with someone in German. When he finishes, he explains to the other two that he has the latest in German technology cell phones. "A chip in my tooth, a chip in my ear and the antenna is inserted in my spine. Ah the wonders of German knowhow!"
At the 13th hole, a phone rings again and upon hearing it, the Japanese fellow disappears into some nearby bushes. The German and the American look at each other and then walk over and peer into the bushes. In the middle of the bushes is the Japanese fellow, squatting with his pants down around his ankles.
"What on earth are you doing?!" asks the American.
The Japanese fellow looks up and replies "Waiting for a fax".

RFID tags cost around 5 cents and are not very flexible mechanically.
What's wrong with the free barcode.

john2

I suspect there may be hidden codes in banknotes, but you probably need
specialist scanning equipment and analysis software. But then again
the whole idea of a note is based on confidence, so it may not be
needed.

On 17 Jul 2006 15:24:04 -0700, "Dave" wrote:


RFID tags cost around 5 cents and are not very flexible mechanically.
What's wrong with the free barcode.

john2

I suspect there may be hidden codes in banknotes, but you probably need
specialist scanning equipment and analysis software.

(x-posts snipped)

Indeed there is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion

take care,
Scott

In uk.legal Dave wrote:

GB wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hi,

In principle, there is nothing to stop you writing down the serial nos of
all your bank notes in case they are stolen. Nobody does, though. Whilst
bar codes would make it easier, I am sure that OCR technology can easily
cope with reading existing serial nos.
Making up a serial number is a whole load easier, as far as I know,
than forging a signed, encrypted barcode. The post is also about
forgery.

There are good reasons for not confiscating money from an innocent end user
simply because the serial no is on a list of stolen notes.
So if I got 5K in cash to buy a car at an auction, got the serial
numbers, and was robbed, if the money turned up at a bank 3 months
later I would have lost ownership? This doesn't seem right, but then
again case law is bad law IHMO. I thought that victims (or relatives
of victims) of the Nazis got their art works back after proving
ownership even if the work was bought in good faith.

Commerce would grind to a halt if everybody had to check each
note against a database of stolen ones.

This is done for many card transactions, even with a low transaction
value.

Card transactions tend to be for more then minor purchases... I think
most shopkeepers would be rather annoyed at having to check notes when
someone buys a newspaper... it sounds a load of rubbish.

Axel

In uk.legal Dik T. Winter wrote:
In article .com "Dave" writes:
John Boyle wrote:

Quite. the point about bank notes is covered quite explicitly in Miller
v Race in which a bank refused to honour one of its notes that had been
stolen and had subsequently found its way to the plaintiff who acquired
it quite legitimately and in good faith. It was held that the bank was
still liable to the plaintiff on the note.

Thank you for your informative post. This leads onto a couple of
issues, the first of which may be worthy of a top level post in
uk.legal.
What about other countries in Europe do they all apply the same ruling?
i.e. harmonization of case law across the EU. This may be especially
relevant if the UK starts using the Euro.

I know that in the Netherlands, when you come in possession of stolen goods
and can show good faith, that you are the legitimate owner of the article,
irrespective of the article, so it can be a banknote. Just about a year
back in Amsterdam there was a similar case. A woman was found in
possession of a bicycle that had been reported as stolen. She was able
to show (convincing enough) that they had not bought the bicycle from a
junk for a low price, but that she had bought it as a second-hand
bicycle in a bicycle-shop. So she was legitimate owner of it, because
buying in a shop is considered to be in good faith.

But, on the other hand, there is nearly no harmonisation of case law
across the EU. In the Netherlands it is based on common law that
basically derives from the Code Napoleon.

Yes... it impossible... case law is not even harmonised within the UK.

Axel

In article Chris Blunt writes:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:25:10 GMT, "Dik T. Winter"
wrote:

I know that in the Netherlands, when you come in possession of stolen goods
and can show good faith, that you are the legitimate owner of the article,
irrespective of the article, so it can be a banknote. Just about a year
back in Amsterdam there was a similar case. A woman was found in
possession of a bicycle that had been reported as stolen. She was able
to show (convincing enough) that they had not bought the bicycle from a
junk for a low price, but that she had bought it as a second-hand
bicycle in a bicycle-shop. So she was legitimate owner of it, because
buying in a shop is considered to be in good faith.

That sounds like a reasonable argument for her not to be prosecuted
for being in possession of stolen goods. What surprises me is that she
was also then considered the legitimate owner. Presumably the original
owner who it was stolen from was denied that status.

Yes, the original owner was no longer legitimate owner. On the other
hand, his insurance would have paid him for the stolen bicycle.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/

"Dik T. Winter" wrote in message
...
In article Chris Blunt
writes:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:25:10 GMT, "Dik T. Winter"
wrote:

I know that in the Netherlands, when you come in possession of stolen
goods
and can show good faith, that you are the legitimate owner of the
article,
irrespective of the article, so it can be a banknote. Just about a
year
back in Amsterdam there was a similar case. A woman was found in
possession of a bicycle that had been reported as stolen. She was
able
to show (convincing enough) that they had not bought the bicycle from
a
junk for a low price, but that she had bought it as a second-hand
bicycle in a bicycle-shop. So she was legitimate owner of it, because
buying in a shop is considered to be in good faith.

That sounds like a reasonable argument for her not to be prosecuted
for being in possession of stolen goods. What surprises me is that she
was also then considered the legitimate owner. Presumably the original
owner who it was stolen from was denied that status.

Yes, the original owner was no longer legitimate owner. On the other
hand, his insurance would have paid him for the stolen bicycle.

What if he decided not to have insurance ?

(I did hear a rumour once that bicycle theft rings in Amsterdam were
financed by the new bicycle retailers).
(I also heard a rumour that car radio theft rings in the UK were financed by
car radio shops).

"Peter Hucker" wrote in message newsp.tct51m1mwabk2w@blue...

A dollar to protect a 2 dollar note?

You can already buy RFID tags far cheaper than that, especially when they
wouldn't need 512kb of storage. A few cents to protect a 500 euro note isn't
such a bad deal, the UK already applies holograms.

Dave wrote:

RFID tags cost around 5 cents and are not very flexible mechanically.
What's wrong with the free barcode.

john2

I suspect there may be hidden codes in banknotes, but you probably need
specialist scanning equipment and analysis software. But then again
the whole idea of a note is based on confidence, so it may not be
needed.
I just remembered that all bits of paper have a unique pattern of
fibres, and this can be looked for by e.g. a laser scanner. If the
note printer scanned every note they put into circulation then they
would know for certain whether a note was a forgery.