3 ms·

Isnt this a catch-22 situation? what makes a "specific meteorite" important for research if they don't get a chance to look at it? The issue, at least for Can

Isnt this a catch-22 situation? what makes a "specific meteorite" important for research if they don't get a chance to look at it? The issue, at least for Canada is the laws are clear: "Canadian law on the matter is clear and simple: Any meteorite found in Canada belongs to the owner of the property it was found on. " So places like the ROM need to ASK that you let them examine what you find. I would assume that if you find something you can turn it over to the ROM to examine and have it returned given it is YOUR property??

dmix 4y ago
That dilemma seems very specific to Canadian law (or any situation where such a law exists). The thing I asked was whether it makes sense to remove the concept of property and markets entirely from meteorites. Sayings yes it's property but adding a minor exception wouldn't eliminate the incentives entirely... but it could severely reduce the incentives to find them and therefore the net gain scientists (and the public) get from making it open to the private hunters. Those details matter a lot in that context, do they have to turn it over indefinitely for 'research'? Do researchers have to compensate the finder if they take it for an extended period of time? etc. That's basically a whole different conversation that's predicated on the core question I proposed but it's a different question.