41–50 of 281 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was legally acquired by the woman who just paid $35 at Goodwill. The thing is two thousand years old. Why do people care who owned it during the Weimar Republic?
People get funny of the provenance of things that were taken by military force, go figure. I'm trying to remember which state it is that periodically asks for their Confederate flag back from the Union state that acquired it on the battlefield.
Back at home, Young had a problem: She was in possession of a looted piece of ancient art. She couldn't keep it. She couldn't sell it. And giving it back to its rightful owners was a lot harder than it sounds. “At that point, I realized I was probably going to need some help,” Young says. “I was probably going to need an attorney.” So she hired a lawyer in New York who specializes in international art law, Leila Amin…
Some points (IANAL): * How is it going to be transported? Squashing it into airplane luggage is probably not a good idea, neither is sending it via a parcel. * What happens if something happens to it during transport? Generally works of art are insured before they are being transported. Do you know insurers though? Before you insure it, you need to determine the value. * For very important works of art, countries mig…
She paid $35 for a piece of art that was stolen by Nazis and felt that she had the right to “negotiate” the terms of its return? How about just give it back?
From the article it sounds like it was stolen from the German people by an American soldier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Unfortunately a lot of the old art in the world only exists because by modern reconing it was stolen. Consider the fabulous collection at the palace museum in Taipei. Much just like it was destroyed in the cultural revolution.
> That sounds like an a posteriori justification for stealing, like saying "see, that building ended up being bombed, so it's a good thing I stole all these Ukrainian paintings from the country last year".
The logical fallacy here is using one unrelated bad event to justify another unrelated bad event.
Taken to its logical conclusion, this argument would be that we should constantly keep looting art left and right, because who knows where and what is going to be destroyed at any moment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was legally acquired by the woman who just paid $35 at Goodwill. The thing is two thousand years old. Why do people care who owned it during the Weimar Republic?
Possession and sale of stolen goods is not legal, just not a crime unless you are aware it's stolen/likely stolen.
She paid $35 for a piece of art that was stolen by Nazis and felt that she had the right to “negotiate” the terms of its return? How about just give it back?
Give it back to whom exactly? How does she know who the "rightful" owner is without knowing its provenance? Possessing looted art is not a good look and neither is transmitting (wittingly or not) to a party that isn't the rightful owner. She did the smart thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Goodwill in particular moves items between markets and prices them based on the local economy. Gone are the days of 2010 when you could walk into the Bellevue Goodwill and find lightly used designer clothing that some retired Microsoft engineer was tired of. Now everything's priced higher than eBay and there's no reason to stop by. Everyone else wants to be a "Boutique" and charge high end prices for used goods. Blam…
My Goodwill in San Rafael takes all the good stuff that comes in the back, and it goes to the San Francisco store to put on ebay. The junk stays in the stores. Every once in awhile something of value does not automatically go to their internet store because it was missed by a back room staffer. A few years ago my Goodwill went through three store managers in a row for stealing over a period of 10 years. One manager w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under the 4th Geneva Convention - looting is a war crime. If you know you're in possession of ill gotten gains - one should always obtain legal advice -
Or you could just keep the receipt from Goodwill and use your money in more better ways than paying a lawyer.
She 100% did the right thing here.
And frankly she deserves a payout for all of the legwork.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately a lot of the old art in the world only exists because by modern reconing it was stolen. Consider the fabulous collection at the palace museum in Taipei. Much just like it was destroyed in the cultural revolution.
Again... > That sounds like an a posteriori justification for stealing, like saying "see, that building ended up being bombed, so it's a good thing I stole all these Ukrainian paintings from the country last year". The logical fallacy here is using one unrelated bad event to justify another unrelated bad event. Taken to its logical conclusion, this argument would be that we should constantly keep looting art left and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you could just keep the receipt from Goodwill and use your money in more better ways than paying a lawyer.
But that’s not how the real world works. She 100% did the right thing here. And frankly she deserves a payout for all of the legwork.