Jewish family fleeing the Nazis sold a Picasso in 1938. Their heirs want it back

Yes, it's distasteful and the person who bought the painting at a knock down price was a slimeball taking advantage of desparate people. But, knee-jerk eotions adide, in essence the situation is no different to anyone selling anything at a knock down price when they're desparate for cash.

I'm sure a lot of us have been in that situation. But, if you don't like the amount you're being offered, find another buyer. If you can't find another buyer then take what's on offer --or don't sell. Either way, it's not really on to come back years later, complaining you were ripped off and demanding [as ever!] compensation.

First off, the article fails to say what price was paid for the art to enter the family, and fails to say what it was worth when it was sold back. It only states the final selling price, and that it was gifted to the museum. This is a red flag. The truth has been deliberately obscured, presumably, to further a narrative.

The family alleges it is worth $100-200 million, leading the reader astray as to how much a just compensation would be.

For example, if the painting was worth $3000 when it sold for $1500, then the logical conclusion is they recieved half value and maximum compensation would be maybe $75 million.

If the painting was worth $15,000, it becomes less relevant.

Then there is the question of what a quick cash sale is worth, especially when it means the survival of a family. What if the purchaser simply didn't have the capital and made a good faith offer to save the lives of a family he knew?

It seems far more appropriate to sue the Nazi government, or whoever is now responsible for the Nazis actions.

This precend, if successfully implemented, could come back to kill millions in the future as noone will liquidate goods at any cost knowing they can't keep them. Ergo, those fleeing prosecution won't be able too.

Perhaps the family should take the L, be thankful their family tree still exists, and take one for team Judaism and not set any highly dangerous precedents. Especially considering that history informs us it is most likely to be Jews who would be a victim to said precedent in the future. I don't believe we are post-history for one second.

I know this doesn't sound empathetic enough and will get a bazillion down votes, but such is life.