Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/06/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Stolen Steve McCurry photos
From: rgacpa at gmail.com (Robert Adler)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 18:06:41 -0700
References: <556F8AB4.4050506@cox.net>

Hmmm. I would think that the rightful owner is the one it is stolen from,
no matter where it ends up. Ignorance is no excuse: why would art be
different from say a car? Someone steals my car, someone buys it from the
thief unknowing it's stolen, so do I, the victim loose my car?
Or am I missing something...

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Ken Carney <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote:

>
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/famed-photographer-asst-stole-650g-worth-prints-da-article-1.2244006
>
> I wonder what happens when a collector buys a stolen print like this?  I'm
> guessing the collector can keep it so long as he/she was not complicit.
> Far from the same facts, but we have an interesting case going on in
> Oklahoma now, where OU has a Pissaro painting stolen from the owner during
> WWII.
>
> http://www.oudaily.com/news/ou-museum-holds-pieces-of-art-with-wwii-nazi-connections/article_f4911dfe-654e-11e4-80ac-0017a43b2370.html
>
> Ken
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Bob Adler
www.robertadlerphotography.com


In reply to: Message from kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney) ([Leica] Stolen Steve McCurry photos)