Hackers hacked into the conversations between an art dealer and a Dutch museum and managed to steal millions of dollars from the museum. Now, the victims are fighting among themselves over who is responsible for the hack and the theft.
According to Bloomberg, London-based art gallery Simon Dickinson and the Dutch Rijksmuseum Twenthe were in talks as they negotiated the sale of a valuable painting by John Constable, an English painter (1776 – 1837).
This is the painting “A View of Hampstead Heath: Childs Hill, Harrow in the Distance”, which had piqued the museum director's interest two years earlier when he had seen it at a European art exhibition.
The conversations between the two institutions took place via emails. There was communication for several months. But at some point, hackers breached the conversation and began sending fake emails to the Dutch museum. The hackers managed to convince the Rijksmuseum Twenthe to transfer £2.4 million ($3.1 million) to a bank account in Hong Kong.
So the museum sent this huge amount to an unknown account and never paid Simon Dickinson for the painting. We still don't know who is behind the theft.
The problem is that both Simon Dickinson and the Rijksmuseum Twenthe disagree and accuse each other of fraud.
Lawsuits have already begun between the two entities. The museum, which is based in Enschede, Netherlands, claims that Simon Dickinson staff who handled the negotiations were involved in the fake emails and failed to report the fraud.
The museum's lawyer argued that this silence on the part of Simon Dickinson could be considered complicity.
On the other hand, Simon Dickinson argues that the negotiators did not detect the presence of the hackers and that the museum should have double-checked the details bank money.
Each party also blames the other for the source of the theft. Both argue that the other party did not adequately protect its systems , allowing hackers to gain access.
The Rijksmuseum Twenthe is seeking damages. A final decision has not been made, but the court appears to be in favor of the museum as it considers that the art dealer did not show due care.
In the meantime, the museum retains the painting, despite the fact that Simon Dickinson has not been paid. Also, Simon Dickinson does not have the right to sell the painting to another collector. According to Artnet, the judge now has to decide who should take the painting.
