tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8174756573570334952.post1867046321921232755..comments2024-03-27T04:46:33.198-07:00Comments on Portable Antiquity Collecting and Heritage Issues: Collector's View: Who Owns the Cultural Property From Italy?Paul Barfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10443302899233809948noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8174756573570334952.post-15412886837895890122010-04-17T23:32:33.052-07:002010-04-17T23:32:33.052-07:00Antiquities are not equivalent to cameras as steal...Antiquities are not equivalent to cameras as stealing them creates massive cultural damage so the trade in stolen ones is more reprehensible and the responsibility to avoid buying them is commensurately greater. <br /><br />So do I lose sleep every time I buy a new watch? No. But would I if I bought an unprovenanced dugup? You bet! I have seen where a lot of them come from. The boys will be out again tonight. How long before the fruits of their labours will be on display over the pond?<br /> <br />“The idea that the burden of proof must fall on the purchaser goes against all reason.”<br /> <br />But no-one has said such a thing. The burden of proof lies with the supplier and the burden of responsibility to ensure it is forthcoming lies with the purchaser, whether dealer or collector. No proof, no deal. The widespread failure to acknowledge that responsibility and to buy regardless is the basis of why collectors and dealers really are the true looters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8174756573570334952.post-8559746312837551672010-04-16T09:12:57.780-07:002010-04-16T09:12:57.780-07:00Heritageaction- Everyone runs the risk of purchasi...Heritageaction- Everyone runs the risk of purchasing stolen goods everytime they shop at the market, go to a garage sale, buy from an electronic goods store, jewelry store, etc. Do you lose sleep every time you purchase a new watch or if you buy a digital camera from a less expensive retailer that may have purchased "grey market" goods from Canada or the Orient instead of through the distributor sanctioned local channel?<br /><br />There are laws in existence to deal with these issues. If I purchase a digital camera from a store in Times Square NYC and it turned out to be stolen, they go to jail. I dont see anyone calling for a banning of all retail sales from anyone smaller than the major stores or chains. I can see it now- Mom and Pop Camera must close, only Best Buy, Macy's and Circuit City are allowed to be in business because there is a "chance" that they may be selling stolen goods.<br /><br />The idea that the burden of proof must fall on the purchaser goes against all reason. Sure, if you are buying goods out the back of a truck at 1am you should know better. There ARE dealers that openly deal in the "dark" but these dealers are subject to the same laws that would put the retail store owner in jail for purchasing stolen goods and they often get caught, proving that the laws do work.Alfredo De La Fehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16438544659388091161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8174756573570334952.post-71143824763305612302010-04-14T00:21:32.416-07:002010-04-14T00:21:32.416-07:00Almost certainly, "extremist" too. Never...Almost certainly, "extremist" too. Never mind, tell them you have dyslexia and meant to write "rabbits".Paul Barfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10443302899233809948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8174756573570334952.post-77636113556398902122010-04-14T00:01:28.400-07:002010-04-14T00:01:28.400-07:00The good Rabbi inadvertently raises a central issu...The good Rabbi inadvertently raises a central issue:<br /><br />“objects which I have bought innocently”.<br /><br />What does that mean, to him and to most collectors? I'd hazard a guess it means "objects I have no reason to think are illicit" - and this, is it not, is the crux of the trade and the reason it's participants, even Rabbis, can tell themselves they are doing nothing wrong and causing no harm to others. <br /><br />As we see it however, every collected item carries a risk it may have been looted and consequently an "innocent purchase" cannot take place on the basis merely that the risk is not evident, only that the risk has been investigated and eliminated. In other words, documentation and proof of provenance are essential, whether the supplier is a main dealer, an intermediary or a man with a spade. <br /><br />Are the Rabbi's "innocent purchases" exclusively of the latter variety? Let us hope so else we at Heritage Action will be running an article next week titled "Rabbis are the true looters"<br /><br />(Oh dear, will that prompt more accusations that conservationists are anti-semitic?! Probably!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com