How about some answers for this? Where are you Peter Nash?

[drcy]

In the expensive fine art world, they say keep your sales receipt because it turns out to be stolen, you legally get your money back from the seller. As an item may have been stolen a long time earlier, the seller may in turn get his money back from the person he bought it from. And so on down the line. Stolen items has long been an issue in the art world, and many buyers will expect you to demonstrate the provenance and legal ownership of a Picasso.

If an item was stolen, you can't legally buy or sell it. You may have paid $5,000, but you don't legally own it. This is why, as a buyer, you should be confident the item you are buying wasn't stolen. Stolen items do exist in the baseball hobby market.

I have no knowledge of the NYPL and its practices and if David says they've never gotten rid of stuff I have no reason to doubt him, but other libraries, schools and even museums do sometimes get rid of extra stuff. Museums have sales, often to get rid of extra stuff or because they're changing the museum's focus.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by drcy

In the expensive fine art world, they say keep your sales receipt because it turns out to be stolen, you legally get your money back from the seller. As an item may have been stolen a long time earlier, the seller may in turn get his money back from the person he bought it from. And so on down the line. Stolen items has long been an issue in the art world, and many buyers will expect you to demonstrate the provenance and legal ownership of a Picasso.

If an item was stolen, you can't legally buy or sell it. You may have paid $5,000, but you don't legally own it. This is why, as a buyer, you should be confident the item you are buying wasn't stolen. Stolen items do exist in the baseball hobby market.

I have no knowledge of the NYPL and its practices and if David says they've never gotten rid of stuff I have no reason to doubt him, but other libraries and even museums do sometimes get rid of extra stuff. Museums have sales, often to get rd of extra stuff or because they're changing the museum's focus.

+1

And said material is always clearly marked as such precisely for the reasons cited above.

[drcy]

One thing is the legal owner has to object for there to be a legal objection. Practically speaking. If your hometown library doesn't care anymore that you didn't return a worn Danielle Steele paperback forty years ago, then the library doesn't care.

Now, on the other hand, if it was a Picasso oil painting instead of a worn Danielle Steele paperback, they likely will care.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by drcy

One thing is the legal owner has to object for there to be a legal objection. Practically speaking. If your hometown library doesn't care anymore that you didn't return a worn Danielle Steele paperback forty years ago, then the library doesn't care.

Now, on the other hand, if it was a Picasso oil painting instead of a worn Danielle Steele paperback, they likely will care.

This seems to be the crux of the issue at hand. The items being dicussed on Nash's website are closer to the Picasso than the Steele novel (certainly in the eyes of the members of this board), yet for some reason the museums in question do not seem all that interested in creating legal objections in all cases.

[drcy]

I agree the Danielle Steele paperback was an extreme example. I didn't even say hardback.

That's why I went back added the Picasso example.

But my point was if the legal owner doesn't object, then the legal owner doesn't object. Nothing an uninvolved third party can do about that. You or I can't sue on the NYPL's behalf.

[slidekellyslide]

I bought a framed print at a garage sale that had our local library's markings on the back along with a pouch and a card that was last stamped in 1961...believe it or not you could at one time check out artwork from the library. I was curious about this item and if it still belonged to the library so I called them and they said they haven't checked out artwork for years. There was absolutely nothing stamped on this item showing it was deaccessioned.

[David Atkatz]

So? The last guy to take it out never returned it.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I bought a framed print at a garage sale that had our local library's markings on the back along with a pouch and a card that was last stamped in 1961...believe it or not you could at one time check out artwork from the library. I was curious about this item and if it still belonged to the library so I called them and they said they haven't checked out artwork for years. There was absolutely nothing stamped on this item showing it was deaccessioned.

Dan, that's particularly true when the item is valuable - I know of a specific example where the item has library stamps, but nothing to indicate that it was ever deaccessioned. The library sold the items to a collector after acquiring a duplicate in better condition, the buyer then re-sold them. The original legal sale by the library definitely occurred. Out of curiosity, I traced it's history and verified all owners, including the library.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

+1

And said material is always clearly marked as such precisely for the reasons cited above.

You keep on insisting this, but no it's not...........and 30-40-50 years ago, I doubt it was either.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

You keep on insisting this, but no it's not...........and 30-40-50 years ago, I doubt it was either.

Yeah. I keep on insisting upon it.

Because it's true.