Hacker News Reader

Comment by boomboomsubban | Hacker News Reader

>Interesting how few are interested in the defense that Hobby Lobby was a victim.

They weren't. With this tablet, maybe they never had any solid reason to suspect it had been looted. This wasn't the only artifact they bought, other items had no documentation detailing their history and they made purchases after being warned that items were likely illegal. It's doubtful they tried very hard to verify this tablets history given their record.

There are other criminals involved, but Hobby Lobby was not a victim.

View on HN

Why are such auctions even allowed? Or was this an illegal auction? It seems to me that any respectable auction house has an obligation to ensure that their service is not abused to fence stolen goods.

It wasn't auctioned as the owner said the provenance would not pass public scrutiny, but instead listed for private sale. I have no clue how the legality of that works in Britain, but Christies exists to allow rich people to show off who is richer. I wouldn't trust their moral character.

Kinda like when you buy a used car at auction, but it turns out it was stolen.

Except the auction house is next door to a well known car thief's garage, the news is full of stories about a string of car thefts, and someone tells you those cars are probably stolen making it crime to buy.

Such is not the reputation of Christie's.

If they had only made this one sketchy purchase, maybe reputation would explain something. Or if there had been any record of them checking the claims made before purchasing this tablet.

Or if Hobby Lobby hadn't publicly accepted that these actions were illegal.

Does Christie's frequently traffic in stolen goods? Is it possible that groups sometimes just defer to Christie's judgement when determining if something can legally be bought and sold or not?

They probably deal in stolen goods somewhat frequently, but even if you could trust whether the sale was legal Hobby Lobby needed to ensure the import was legal.

Would the onus then be on the amazon consumer to verify that their purchase wasn't counterfeit

If you are buying something from another country, you are responsible for ensuring it is legal to ship into your country. A seller doesn't need to know every countries laws.

That said, knowingly buying counterfeits is illegal. If you have good reason to suspect it's counterfeit before buying, you could be charged.

Do you want to take a wager of how many times Christie’s is wrong regarding provenance for multimillion dollar historical items?

Not bad for hobby lobby, damned if they do and dammed if they don’t.

>Do you want to take a wager of how many times Christie’s is wrong regarding provenance for multimillion dollar historical items?

Do you want to explain why they also purchased artifacts from private dealers in the United Arabs Emirate? Or how Christie's is responsible for their illegal import of the Gilgamesh Tablet?

>Not bad for hobby lobby, damned if they do and dammed if they don’t.

I assume that is why they already accepted their guilt and paid a three million dollar fine.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/05/hobby-lobby-fine-i...

What's the end game of shilling for hobby lobby? Flagging negative news of various governments I get like 共匪, huge corporations do it far less, but hobby lobby seems like such a weird company to engage in astroturfing. They played a minor role in past administrations but they seem like even smaller potatoes lately.

They are a prominent member of the Red tribe of American politics. I don't think you're seeing astroturfing so much as you're seeing tribalism.

I like hobby lobby because it’s one of the few places I can get good craft supplies for my kids, I suppose that’s why I “shilled” for them here (your words).

Besides, I think the negative sentiment towards them is obviously politically driven, and not some genuine concern for artifact provenance and ownership.

> Do you want to take a wager of how many times Christie’s is wrong regarding provenance for multimillion dollar historical items?

About a third of the time. That's why modern paintings are more valuable than older ones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com