Compassionate hero & karmic justice (WAS Re: Appeal of the story to the reader)

[rowena_grunnionffitch]

No: HPFGUIDX 176005

> Random832:

> Anyway, sarcasm aside, Goblins come off here as being pretty
> incompetent in legal/financial terms: life tenancy isn't unheard
> of in property rights among humans, though usually applies to
> real estate rather than physical items - so there's no reason
> to think that humans wouldn't understand the concept if they
> were told. That leaves the conclusion that Goblins are either
> too bloody stupid to specify what exactly they're charging money
> for, or they're committing what amounts to fraud, because the
> prices wizards are willing to pay, and thus what they _are_
> paying, are set on the _assumption_ that they're buying the
> item free and clear, and therefore they are paying many times
> more gold than they would for a non-transferable lifetime lease.
> So even if we DO accept that the goblins are right about what's
> ACTUALLY being sold, they are overcharging by deception.


Now that is a very good point - and an excellent example of
the 'six of one half dozen of another' that seems the keynote
of Wizard / Goblin relations.

Bill states that only *some* Goblins - including many at Gringotts
- take the very extreme position that *all* Goblin made items
belong by right to the Goblins. This suggests that others feel
differently, perhaps accepting Human Wizard ideas of free and
clear purchase in individual contracts if not as a general
principle.

BTW even under the maker-is-owner principle Griphook would have
no more right to G's sword than a human - unless he made it that
is! The notion that his species gives him some kind of ownership
doesn't seem to fit Goblin law any better than human law.

Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch