Not in the eyes of the law , if you had the serial number of the radio and receipt, the law would support your claim on it.
Its the same with moonrock, NASA have stated
NASA has given hundreds of lunar samples to nations, states and high-profile individuals but only on the understanding they remain government property
The chain of ownership is pretty clear, NASA was the agency that brought the rocks back, the woman cannot establish a legal claim of ownership, thus her sample is stolen govt property (thats if its even genuine moonrock)
Her claim the sample was "given" to them by Armstrong cannot be proven as he himself denies it.
Davis claims Armstrong gave the items to her husband, though the affidavit says the first man on the moon has previously told investigators he never gave or sold lunar material to anyone.
She was asking 1.7 million dollars for it, if i sold you a stolen or fake Rembrant painting for 1.7 million, you would be entitled to redress in a court of law.
NASA can prove ownership, they have placed a caveat on all items that they remain the property of the US govt.
Thus the only entity that legally owns moonrock is the US Govt
She cannot prove ownership, while i acknowledge the image of a granny wetting herself is an emotionally charged one, the fact remains that NASA's caveat on ownership means she does not own, therefore cannot sell the item.
A public library "owns" the books in its collection, they may lend you a book, but possesion of that book is not ownership.
They have essentially done the exact same thing with lunar samples, retaining legal ownership of the items even after they have been "lent" out
And again while this matter is a storm in a teacup, the real issue here is the precedent.
Personally i think it would be wiser for NASA to allow people to sell moonrock, and charge a reasonable fee to certify the samples, but they have chosen instead to retain the rights to ownership.
Even if Armstrong had confirmed the provenance, she would still not be able to legally sell it, since NASA retains the right of ownership.
The library book example illustrates this, if someone borrows a book, and then gives that book to a neigbour, that person cant sell the book even though they posses it, the library retains the right of ownership
The amount of time elapsed is irrelevant
an example is looted artworks from WW2
This is a major issue for the art market, since legitimate organizations do not want to deal in objects with unclear ownership titles[SUP].[/SUP] Since the mid 1990s, after several books, magazines, and newspapers began exposing the subject to the general public, many dealers, auction houses and museums have grown more careful about checking the provenance of objects that are available for purchase in case they are looted. Some museums in the United States and elsewhere have agreed to check the provenance of works in their collections with the implied promise that suspect works would be returned to rightful owners if the evidence so dictates
The emotive aspect of the case aside, NASA can prove ownership, and can prove they have not relinquised that right. As such in a court of law she wouldnt have a legal leg to stand on, the court would find NASA are the rightful owners
