From the same links that you listed. From the second link: http://kiddynamitesworld.com/no-gld-shares-may-not-be-used-to-settle-comex-contracts/ Anyway, the rule change was that the Exchange allowed members to use substantially equivalent instruments in EFP transactions, rather than just physical bullion. The exchange specifically mentioned gold-backed exchange traded funds as suitable for the transactions. The article says GLD can't be used in place of physical gold if someone calls for physical delivery, but it can be used in a EFP transaction. The rule can be found here: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/js-kim-max-keiser-discusses-banker-manipulation-gold-silver-futures Exchange Rule 104.36 enacted on February 18, 2005, which allows for the substitution of gold ETFs for physical gold, states that the "physical" part of the transaction "need only be substantially the economic equivalent of the futures contract being exchanged" and that "the purpose of this Notice is to confirm that the Exchange would accept gold-backed exchange-traded funds ('ETF') shares as the physical commodity component for an EFP transaction involving COMEX gold futures contracts, provided that all elements of a bona fide EFP pursuant to Exchange Rule 104.36 are satisfied. Thus, acceptable gold-backed and exchange-traded ETF funds include, but are not limited to, the iSharesCOMEX Gold Trust (ticker: IAU), which began trading on the American Stock Exchange on January 28, 2005." From your first link, the first paragraph: http://www.24hgold.com/english/contributor.aspx?contributor=Tom+Szabo&article=2237184432G10020 Adrian Douglas, a Director of GATA, wrote a piece recently called The Alchemist in which he pointed out that the "Exchange of Futures for Physical" ("EFP") mechanism of the gold commodity market allows ETF shares such as IAU and GLD in the definition of "Physical Products". While this is true,... Note that GLD shares is used in the second example in that article in a EFP transaction.
