You said it was a hypocritical discussion, which does not state, but does imply, either minor deceit, or some outright bald-faced-lying. So it seemed you thought I was a liar, but I did not quote you as having said the word "liar".
International "thieving" of artwork during conflict? Well, NOW we are getting somewhere! What constitutes infringement upon the artistic cultural history of a nation, sounds very interesting. It's not quite the topic, but this isn't my thread, remember? So let's do it.
Despite the compendium of knowledge already here in the forums, it's clear from your own posts that you still have strong, unresolved, thoughts on exactly this area. My only offense was when someone implied that we should not have this discussion because all the answers were found in the links. If that were true, neither of us would still be talking.
As for the Louvre and the like (yes, I've been there, among other places), countries have pillaged and plundered eachother for over a millennium, and societies before that. Museums are often more like trophy cases than exhibits of art for its own sake. It IS a travesty, but INTERPOL is not like NATO for art, and they generally cannot force a country to relinquish it without starting a war, which would likely only destroy it, and countless other artifacts.
Sometimes nations do exchange valuable items stolen during war, or by other means, as a gesture of goodwill, but not often enough. The trouble is that I also wanted to find out about copyright law for practical reasons, which is what I was seeking earlier. I guess this works too though.
Have at it ...
