• 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.