Slashdot Mirror
Sunken Treasure Worth $500 Million Found Off England
An anonymous reader writes "In a modern day (and underwater) version of Indiana Jones, the AP is reporting that Odyssey Marine Exploration has recovered an estimated $500 Million in colonial coins from a 400 year old shipwreck in the Atlantic. The exact location of the wreck is still undisclosed. Odyssey is a for-profit, publicly traded company. 'In seeking exclusive rights to that site, an Odyssey attorney told a federal judge last fall that the company likely had found the remains of a 17th-century merchant vessel that sank with valuable cargo aboard, about 40 miles off the southwestern tip of England. A judge granted those rights Wednesday. In keeping with the secretive nature of the project dubbed ''Black Swan,'' Odyssey also is not discussing details of the coins, such as their type, denomination or country of origin. Bruyer said he observed a wide variety of coins that probably were never circulated. He said the currency was in much better condition than artifacts yielded by most shipwrecks of a similar age. The coins -- mostly silver pieces -- could fetch several hundred to several thousand dollars each, with some possibly commanding much more, he said.'"
what stops courts in other countries from giving other companies the right to also go salvaging for whatever is to be found there?
Can't let pirate treasure get away!
argh!
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
Phase 1. Treasure
Phase 2. ???
Phase 3. Stop Global Warming
Only now does it become obvious that what we needed were more pirates.
I believe its being handled by not giving away the gps coordinates in a very large ocean until all the treasure has been acquired.
You'd be looking for a needle in several large haystacks to find the actual divers that are harvesting it.
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
Inexpensive maps available for just $99
In my attempts to consider the relation between pirate's treasure and technology news, I could only come up with a few ideas, none of which were addressed in the summary or TFA: 1. The coins had an unusually high electrical conductivity / specific weight ratio 2. They were produced by (at-the-time) high tech currency manufacturing technology or, 3. It's just because Pirates are popular lately.....
...that pirates are better than ninjas. You never get to read about ninja treasure found underwater !
What's to stop someone from just waiting until they leave port then following the ship/boat?
Wonder how they stop that one suspicious cabin cruiser that keeps tailing them from port to salvage site.
Maybe some kind of court order or injunction..what if another takes its place..
I'd imagine the easiest way would be to lure these stalkers into international waters then sink them with the cannons.
Yaaarrrr!
If the wreck was 40 miles off the English coast, it should in English, or possibly French, territorial waters. So why ask a US judge?
Goodness knows. If BBC Radio is to be believed, the nearest country seems to be the UK. And the ship that sank was English (dating back to before the existance of the UK). But the salvage company are American. And the treasure was nicked by the English from the Spanish. Who presumaby nicked the original Ag/Au from the native South Americans before making it into coins. So why it is a federal Judge who gets to decide who can salvage the stuff, I don't know. Because it is a US company, I suppose.
I'm not quite getting it. Leaving aside the difficulties of shooting, who would stand in for the evil Nazis? I suppose they could have the Taliban in scuba gear.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
This is a travesty. This centuries-old sunken treasure is of immeasurable cultural and archaeological value. That the contents of this ship are to be handed over to private corporation to be auctioned off to the highest bidder like so many pork bellies is an insult to human acheivement.
This is just another spadeful to the existing mountain of evidence of the crucial need for copyright reform in today's digital age.
ARR
Yeah you could follow them, but there are hundreds if not thousands of these modern day pirate types that go looking for lost treasures of pirates of old. So you'd still be taking a huge chance.
I'm willing to bet that anyone who spends enough money on gear and time to go tracking down treasures worth that much and finally finds one isn't about to share it with some noob that follows them around. Pirates and those that seek their lost treasure probably aren't the sharing type. Think pillage etc...
As far as where the treasure ends up in international seas, I'm sure these guys are fast at what they do and making a case against them will be hard. The crime scene is under several hundred feet of water. Probably most countries have more pressing issues to deal with when it comes to their naval fleets. Picking on pirates just doesn't seem to be worth the trouble. Its not like they're running drugs.
just mho though. ask my sister she's the one with the law degree.
Not that I have anything against pirates. ~wink~ I'm just more of a ninja type lady!
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
Apparently, the ZEUS ROV is used by Odyssey Marine Exploration in the search for artifacts. It weighs 7.3 tonnes (in air) and is 3.2 metres long, and it can operate down to depths of 2500 metres.
It was originally designed for the maintenance of deep-ocean fibre optic cables, and has manipulators and high-resolution video feeds that allow items to be handled with great precision
http://shipwreck.net/zeus/
Indiana Jones would've put that shit in a Museum, not paid dividends to his shareholders.
The site is beyond the territorial waters or legal jurisdiction of any country
Exactly. What has a 'federal judge' got to do with something off the coast of England?
Because you can - or because you should?
They later found they were just caught up in a Pirates of the Caribbean 3 promotion.
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
Here's a partial write-up from Motley Fool . com: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2003/08/19/s triking-investment-gold.aspx?vstest=search_042607_ linkdefault
from 2003:
"Odyssey does not have enough assets to list on the Nasdaq National Market, so it trades on the highly speculative Bulletin Board exchange, a place investors should all but categorically avoid. We all dream of finding a hidden gem cheap and riding it to riches, but you're much more likely to find your fortune on the Nasdaq or NYSE, trading in double digits.
We're looking at Odyssey today as an exception, because it's August, half of you are on vacation, and this company has a heck of a fun story -- but all the fun is in the treasure hunting, not the stock.
Like flotsam (or a dead fish), the stock has drifted without purpose from moon to moon, just waiting for a current to carry it. In July, Odyssey announced the discovery of an unnamed steamer, and over the next month speculators lifted the shares from $1.50 to $2.95. After news of the SS Republic broke last weekend, Odyssey's stock opened Monday above $5, valuing the company at $140 million -- a price rivaling the maximum value of the discovery."
Now the stock is over $8.
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
Posts don't get removed from Slashdot. Check your comment threshold.
Well we all saw in Iraq what happened to people who ignored America's version of 'International' Law.
Be nice, sponsor me: http://jailbreak.ragabonds.org.uk
You had better hope that Bush doesn't user the inter-pipes
Presumably $500m is due to the historical value of the coins, not their mass. How do they go about making sure counterfeits are not slipped in? I would think that modern metallurgy is (IMNAM) advanced enough to fabricate any desired ratio isotopes in an alloy. Smells like Pump and Dump to me...
There are treaties that enumerate all this. Depending on what the treaties say, Odyssey Marine Exploration might have to turn over a chunk of the profits to England.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
This is no map. It looks like...dancing lessons.
The world always seems brighter when you've just made something that wasn't there before. - Neil Gaiman
The coins -- mostly silver pieces -- could fetch several hundred to several thousand dollars each, with some possibly commanding much more, he said.
Not if there are thousands of them. Scarcity adds value. Hmmm 40 miles of the coast of England and they seek jurisdiction in a US courtroom? Sounds like a job for the SBS...
This is all guesswork on my part from bits and pieces I've picked up, but at 40 miles from the UK, the UK government has no jurisdiction. The ship sank hundreds of years ago, so has no actual owners (and if I understand it, a ship abandoned or sunk in international waters has no owners anyway). I think international treaties essentially have a "finders keepers" rule for wrecks, but national law may still require companies to go through some legal processes to prove that they were the first people there and they do actually have salvage rights.
The coins -- mostly silver pieces -- could fetch several hundred to several thousand dollars each
Somehow I doubt that unleashing half a million of these '$1000' coins onto the market isn't going to drastically lower their going rate.
Supply and demand, anyone?
It's only a matter of time before they realise the treasure is cursed and they have to go out and fight Johnny Depp. Then stab Orlando Bloom.
So I guess it isn't all bad news.
Admiralty law, established by treaties that just about every country with a coastline are parties to.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
"Weighs" IIRC is an acceptable substitute for measuring the mass.
What will you say, "it masses 7.3 tonnes?"
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people." ~V, V For Vendetta (2005)
I still believe in my country's Bill of Rights.
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
As a Brit, I've grown up knowing that any treasure found on british land is the property of the queen... that is why treasure hunters here are doing it for prestige and not money. I'm sure this would extend to UK waters. I don't understand how a judge would, nay, COULD grant exclusive rights, that also makes no sense. I just come to the conclusion that either the company is lying or the company is going to get a law suit soon.
Indiana Jones seemed to be more out there to uncover history for the world, and to keep artifacts out of the hands of private owners.
I'm curious to know how a US judge would have any jurisdiction over a wreck 40 miles off the English coast?
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Don't you think it makes sense to say "found off England" than to say "found 2819 miles off Florida"? Or is there something wrong with giving an indication of the location?
""Found Off England", besides making no sense, makes it sound like this was some English-only thing." Aye, you're absolutely correct. From now on I'm going to refer to the Titanic as a ship that sank off the coast of New Zealand, the Bermuda Triangle as a region off the coast of Sierra Leone, and the Principality of Sealand as a sea-fort off the coast of Chile. I mean - it's all one big ocean, right? Wahey! I'm gonna become a geography teacher! Ph33r m3 4 1 4m 133t !!!eleventy-one!!!
This is where the serious fun begins.
a ship abandoned or sunk in international waters has no owners anyway
Unless it is a war grave. In that case, the ship is forever owned by the government of the country that it sailed for, or its internationally recognised sucessor, no matter whose waters the wreck is located in. HMS Hood is property of the UK government, despite her position in international waters. KM Bismarck is property of the German government (I don't know which Germany would have been considered owner between 1945 and 1990, but it doesn't matter: either one would have been "done the trick").
Linux user since early January 1992.
The article states:
But the union of the parliaments between Scotland and England didn't happen until 1707. Therefore there was no British fleet in 1694; it was an English fleet.
todo - The developer's equivalent of confession: "Forgive me Father, for I have sinned..."
An exclusive economic zone extends for 200 nautical miles (370 km) beyond the baselines of the territorial sea, thus it includes the territorial sea and its contiguous zone.[3] A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot regulate or prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea, whether innocent or belligerent, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod War). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters.
They're not pirates, they're salvagers.
"In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." -- Carl Sagan, Cosmos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_Economic_Z
12 nautical miles of territorial waters is the immediate control any nation has over the seaways around its coastline. As for the use of natural resources, salvage and marine resources, this logically has had to extend an awful lot further. There has been a general requirement to request permission from the nation when salvaging in their economic zones as in the case of a vessel Japan have been salvaging in China's zone in 2002. This wreck site could also come under cultural heritage agreements, although this is slightly sketchy. Salvage law is not applicable to that though.
Yes, they do. See above. Seems like a judge needs to read something about current maritime law, but the US never ceases to surprise me.
Typical anonymous fuckwit who thinks he can quote RTFA. But there you are.
Recovery of such artifacts are covered by either national or international law depending on what kind of waters they are in.
Longstanding tradition has included a law of salvage and a law of finds. The law of salvage covers vessels in peril or goods lost that are still claimed by its owner. There is also a long tradition of ignoring the law of savage when nobody was around to enforce it. The law of finds covers vessels like this that have been abandoned by its owners. Such vessels become the property of the first person to start recovery attempts, although there are provisos when such discoveries are made in areas owned by others and would interfere with those others' rights (e.g. you can own treasure found on somebody else's property, but not necessarily if you have to dig it up).
The US and several other nations assert an exception for military wrecks; they claim that such wrecks remain the property of the flag country, even if sunken in territorial waters of other nations. Recovering artifacts from such ships is equivalen to boarding them.
Outside of those considerations, nations may regulate recovery activities in various zones of authority.
There are five legal navigational zones: inland waterways and lakes; territorial seas (12 mile limit); contiguous seas (24 mile limit); and the exclsuive economic zone (200 miles), and the high seas. Within the 12 mile limit, nations are sovereign. Within the twenty four mile limit, they may impose certain regulations, including retrieval of underwater artifacts of archaelogical or historical significance.
Outside the 24 mile limit, they may not regulate recovery of underwater artifacts AFAIK. The 200 mile EEZ only applies to natural resources.
So, given the apparent location of the wreck in question, the UK does not have authority to grant or deny ownership to anywone per se; but they can recognize title gained by private individuals under traditional international maritime law.
International conventions have been proposed to protect underwater culutral heritage -- human made artifacts and vessels that have been underwater for more than 100 years -- on the high seas. The conventions state that any archaeological wreck is to be managed with the benefit of humanity in mind; preferably preserved in situ, but otherwise disposed of in a way consistent with it being the common heritage of all humanity. These conventions have not been ratified by enough nations to be considered in force. The US is one of the nations which objects, primariliy because we claim sovereignty over military wrecks. I dont' doubt that the spirit of the new conventions are loathsome to the current administration's principles.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Argh, the term ye be lookin' fer is "pre-emptive nautical salvage experts" or simply "pastafarians."
"wide variety of coins that probably were never circulated" = $500 Million A ship wreck full of them = $ ??
RTFWA. The US has not signed the Law of the Sea treaty. So the EEZ is not recognized in American law.
Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
"Depending on what the treaties say, Odyssey Marine Exploration might have to turn over a chunk of the profits to England."
/. but one from the toronto star,
I didn't read the article linked to on
"But under the terms of an agreement, Odyssey will have to share any finds with the British government. The company will get 80 per cent of the first $45 million and about 50 per cent of proceeds thereafter."
That agreement apparently refers to a different site:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/215550
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
I think you meant to say that we saw in Kuwait what happened to people who ignored Iraq's version of International Law.
I could be wrong.
"Well we all saw in Iraq what happened to people who ignored America's version of 'International' Law."
Yeah, that's why the 'Axis of Evil' was wiped off the map.
Godwin, much?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
And the new Pirates of the Carribean movie is released when exactly?
This is old news, spun up by the movie PR to promote the movie.
Sorry, but that's just not enough nowadays. You need to get permission from the countries' EEZ zones you'll be working in to clear it with them, and the shipwreck may well be a war grave or can now be considered as a cultural heritage site which would apply in this case. You can't just pull artifacts from a site, ship them out and sell them for profit. These have been prompted by the free-for-alls like the Titanic salvages. There are any number of Is to dot and Ts to cross. These days you cannot just invoke an international waters and admiralty clause and get a federal judge to sign it over to you. The US also has the Abandoned Shipwreck Act to consider in each case. If that is all they did then these people are indeed incompetent. However, this seems to be the typical US centred attitude to everything.
Oh, and if you're going to call someone a cunt, is it too much to ask for you to actually do some fucking research first and learn what the laws actually fucking well are and how they've actually been applied in real cases, OK?
I love it when people have their own idea of what the law is versus what it actually is in the real world and how it's applied, but there you go.
One thing I should add is that even though the US has not ratified the treaty, it has still claimed jurisdiction over its EEZ zone in the past. Go figure.
Maritime law is full of grey areas and niceties to be observed because of the lack of clear jurisdiction. If you don't pay attention to them your salvage operation is likely to end up dead in the water with no items recovered and no money.
If this vessel is located just 40 miles from the English coast it is not in international waters. Anything found within 200 nautical miles of the British coastline belongs to the British Crown. All finds within that limit must, by law, be reported to the UK Receiver of Wrecks, who alone decides who gets to keep what. In practice his decision is based upon his estimate of the historical and archaeological significance of the find, though a finder is normally financially compensated for anything the Receiver decides to keep. If a treasure hunter removes artefacts without the permission of the Receiver he is guilty of theft from the British Crown; he can expect to be dealt with according to law, and if he is not a British subject he can expect to face extradition to stand trial. US judges have no jurisdiction to make orders concerning either the territory or the property of the British Crown.
One would have thought that a company set up to go international treasure hunting would have taken the trouble firstly to acquaint themselves with these elementary legal realities; unless of course they foolishly imagined that they could get away with ignoring them!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Mons ter
That should explain everything.
I, for one, welcome our new flying spaghetti monster overlord.