• wjrii@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me, it involves as taking control of the ship in the midst of an attack by medically-altered sociopathic scientists obsessed with ancient alien technology.

    • dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A ship that has been on the bottom of the ocean for 450 years. France had plenty of time to claim it.

      • Phanatik@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are claiming it. It was found in 2016 and since has been in a legal battle for ownership between those who found it and the country it belonged to when it sank. Just because you find a wreck doesn’t entitle you to pilfer it for treasure. Stuff like that belongs in a museum not some private collection.

          • Phanatik@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    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.