Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy
In museum studies classes we debate these types of issues, but about ancient artifacts that crossed international lines generations ago. In many cases, it's debatable who is the rightful (however you wish to define rightful) owner, and sometimes the popular ethical view and the law differ.
|
Yeah, this makes me think of the whole mummy craze in the past and even the current fascination to some degree. At one point in time or another people were buying mummies for "medicinal" purposes, to make "mummy brown" paint, to unwrap at parties as a spectacle, etc. You could order a mummy through a newspaper ad and have one show up at your front door. Considering they were once actual living human beings that raises all sorts of issues. Hopefully many of us that choose to be buried don't get desecrated in such ways in thousands of years.
Anyhow, back to baseball. There are all sorts of questionable items out there in the memorabilia world in regards to ownership. It's my opinion that historically significant baseball items belong in the hands of a museum for all to enjoy. I get the legal aspect of ownership and obviously agree with that. So yeah, if you own something you are free to do with it what you wish, well to some degree. Luckily many items over the years have been graciously donated. I guess it circles back to ethical or legal views and both can be right.