this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
93 points (95.1% liked)

World News

39045 readers
3457 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bell 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This will mean less treasure hunters finding old wrecks because there's no financial incentive

[–] sylver_dragon 27 points 1 year ago

Or less incentive to talk about their discoveries publicly. I suspect future hunters will just loot the wreck, destroying much of the archeological value and then offload the artifacts on unregulated markets, further degrading any historic benefit.

[–] aegis_sum 12 points 1 year ago

I don't think the current government of France is the same as the one that lost the ship. Pretty sure they lost a lot of heads of government at some point.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Standing in the way of GME is the Sunken Military Craft Act (SMCA), a law signed by then-president George W. Bush in 2004 which recognizes the sovereignty of a country over its former warships.

Seems like this would remove most of the incentive to look for them.

[–] dezmd 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Wait a second, why is there a thumbnail of Jacksonville on this random article" was my first thought.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

DUUUUUUVALLL!!!!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I imagine sailing the Caribbean before weather forecasts could be a bit treacherous. How long does it take for a hurricane to pass through?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

There are usually several every late summer.

[–] Chickenstalker 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Think carefully about this ruling. This might have huge repercussions on stolen relics held in European museums.

[–] Nurgle 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Standing in the way of GME is the Sunken Military Craft Act (SMCA), a law signed by then-president George W. Bush in 2004 which recognizes the sovereignty of a country over its former warships.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Huh, GameStop is really branching out.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I get it, treasure hunters want to be compensated for finding wrecks but understand that if you do find one, that does not make you its owner. If it belonged to France when it sank, the wreck still belongs to France. "Finders keepers" is not a game you want to play with archaeologists.

[–] dezmd 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is France still the same government entity that it was in the 1600s?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Not sure if you're genuinely interested, but for purposes of international law, yes. The idea of "France" is actually a series of successor states who retain certain rights and obligations, including ownership of military assets.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I don't see how that's relevant. France as a sovereign nation still exists regardless of what form the government takes. The ship belongs to France, not the government of France.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What about legitimate salvage?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What do you define as "legitimate salvage"?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Beyond that, it seems the question is whose museum.

[–] wolfpack86 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Abandoned property is a thing. There should be a reasonable time limit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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??

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 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.

[–] 44razorsedge -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If the French had founded America, who would the French have to spit on now?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] XbSuper 1 points 1 year ago

They're right to do that though.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The British