this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
90 points (95.0% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2646 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Phanatik@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Leaving a sofa on your driveway is hardly the same as a 450 year old shipwreck. You can't claim a historical artefact just because you found it.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Wait 450 years and suddenly the sofa becomes an artifact with ownership as well?

If there is historical significance and there is a wish to preserve the item for the public and not let the finder keep the item, the finder should be compensated in cash at fair market value. This is actually done when people find things like viking coins, etc. It's much more reasonable of an approach.

Furthermore was Spain actively looking for it??

[–] Phanatik@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

First of all, the vessel was French and also a warship which qualifies it for the SMCA.

Secondly, there is historical significance. The defeat in Florida resulted in the French colonising Canada. The ship marks the turning point for when Florida was almost held by the French before the Spanish kicked them out.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The crux of it isn't whether the law applies or not, it's whether the law should exist or not.

I argue the law is dumb or should have an expriy window of 50 years or whatever.

If they really wanted it, they should have found it themselves.

[–] Phanatik@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Finders keepers isn't legally binding and there's a vast difference between a company owning a shipwreck and a country, namely that the company will just auction off whatever it finds to private collections or museums for the sake of profit.

There should be a bounty for finding historical pieces but you shouldn't be able to own them. Just because you found it, doesn't make you the de facto owner.

I don't know whether or not France were looking for it but they are within their rights to claim what's theirs.