[FrankWakefield]

Peter,

First, in your example, you didn't own the Wagner, you only had possession of it, ownership remained with the owner from whom it was stolen.

Yes, you recover from your seller. Now I don't know about an auction house's liability on conveying good title. I think they'd try to avoid that, I don't believe that auction houses pull items because of that potential liability, but rather to avoid possible criminal charges (once they know, or should know, that a lot may well be stolen). And your seller recovers from his seller, all the way back to the thief.

I missed the part where someone who bought a Wagner long ago for $25k wouldn't now be entitled to the card back, even if it had appreciated in value. Are you saying a true owner shouldn't be entitled to the gain?? Steal low, sell high, is that what you're advocating??


At this point I cannot imagine that either of us will change the other's mind; and in no way did I think that a goal here. Simply put, I think the victim of a theft retains ownership, and I see excellent societal reasons for maintaining that. You seem to advocate that a true owner who's victim of a theft reaching a point in time when he'd lose ownership by passage of time, by failing to vigilantly seek and reacquire his personalty, or other ways. I understand that, just don't see the justice in it. It would be good for collectors with good security measures, bad for society. Seems to me that encourages and facilitates the conversion of stolen goods.

And with that I think I'm done with this thread.