Many thanks to all of you that replied.
While on the surface the law seems OK, I still do not like it.
I fully understand the need of a country to preserve its heritage but a fairer law would have been to let the proceeds go to auction and have the goverment match the winning price.
This process is already in place in the UK when it comes to paintings. Whenever a Lord or Lady wants to sell a work of a Master (you see this headline all the time) the National Board (or whatever it is called) always tries to buy it at market price.
The point is that the market price is fairly determined by the MARKET and not some “independent” board
Capitalism at work! :)
Cheers to my UK friends who posted.
“While on the surface the law seems OK, I still do not like it.
I fully understand the need of a country to preserve its heritage but a fairer law would have been to let the proceeds go to auction and have the goverment match the winning price.”
How would that work? It goes into auction, then when the winning bidder comes up to collect his new artifacts, the government comes and says ‘OK, so we know what these are worth now, so we’ll match his price and take them off your hands. Oh, sorry mate, looks like you wasted your time bidding for these things.....’
It would that metal detectorists who had not come to a written agreement with the landowner might find themselves in a poor legal position.