Editor’s Note
This article reports on the concerning appearance of listings for purported stolen artifacts from the Louvre Museum on online marketplaces. We remind readers that trading in stolen cultural property is illegal. All claims should be treated with extreme skepticism, and any relevant information should be reported to the proper authorities.
Recently, the Louvre Museum in Paris, France, was hit by a robbery, resulting in the theft of multiple precious artifacts. The case is under investigation, and the stolen jewelry remains missing.
On October 22, listings for what appeared to be the “stolen jewelry” quickly surfaced on domestic second-hand trading platforms. Multiple listings for “Louvre Museum stolen jewelry” appeared, with prices ranging from 990,000 yuan to 99.99 million yuan. The product descriptions were filled with phrases like “95% new, well-preserved, urgent sale at low price” and “Louvre treasure, just arrived from Paris yesterday, highest bidder wins.” Some even included pictures of the crime scene, deliberately linking to the heist.
In response, media reporters informed the Xianyu platform that multiple sellers were offering the “stolen jewelry.” The platform’s customer service responded that its big data system is also monitoring from multiple dimensions. If users see such listings, they can directly report them on the page, which will trigger manual specialist intervention and further review. The platform has reported the situation raised by the journalists and will reply after verification.
Many netizens have commented that this is “making a meme.” Some sellers responded to inquiries with vague statements like “being abstract” or “it’s a bit hot,” while others directly requested “free shipping.” However, regardless of the authenticity of the items or the sellers’ motives for listing them, does this behavior carry legal risks? What regulatory responsibilities should the platform fulfill?
Let’s look at the professional interpretation from Hu Qingchun, a lawyer from Beijing Yinghe Law Firm and a member of the Legal Daily’s Lawyer Expert Pool!
1. If a seller fabricates false sales information for the purpose of “making a meme,” is it illegal? If a seller genuinely engages in selling such items, do they need to bear corresponding legal responsibility?
2. Does the platform have regulatory negligence, and does it need to bear legal responsibility?
The platform’s actions are suspected of violating multiple laws and regulations. The Cybersecurity Law stipulates that network operators should strengthen the management of information published by their users. Upon discovering information whose publication or transmission is prohibited by laws or administrative regulations, they should immediately stop its transmission and take disposal measures such as removal. Failure to implement these measures may result in penalties from relevant authorities; refusal to correct or serious circumstances may lead to fines, suspension of related business, rectification orders, revocation of business licenses, and fines for directly responsible personnel.
Furthermore, the E-commerce Law stipulates that goods sold or services provided by e-commerce operators should meet requirements for protecting personal and property safety and must not sell or provide goods or services whose transaction is prohibited by laws or administrative regulations. Upon discovering product or service information on the platform violating these provisions, necessary disposal measures should be taken according to law and reported to relevant authorities.
Louvre artifacts, whether genuine or fake, are prohibited from being traded on the platform. Therefore, if the platform fails to implement the above regulations, market supervision departments can, according to the E-commerce Law, order the platform to make corrections within a time limit. Failure to do so may result in fines; serious cases may lead to orders for business suspension and fines.
Moreover, if the platform knowingly provides trading services for sellers offering “Louvre stolen jewelry,” it may constitute an accomplice in the crime of “concealing or disguising criminal proceeds.”
In addition to the above responsibilities, if the platform fails to fulfill its supervisory obligations, leading to buyers being defrauded by purchasing counterfeits, and the platform cannot provide the seller’s true identity information, according to the Consumer Rights Protection Law, buyers can demand the platform to bear advance compensation liability. If the platform knowingly or should have known that the seller used its platform to infringe upon consumers’ legitimate rights, it must bear joint and several liability with the seller towards the consumer.
Source: Legal Daily, Reporter Zhang Bo, Intern Reporter Zhang Wanying
