You are trying really hard to obfuscate the issues here. The accusation is that Obbink stole the fragments and sold them.

Using the correct name of the corporation to which he sold the stolen fragments is not "a fun way to denigrate the people involved".

As far as the museum, given their clear willingness to skirt legal and ethical boundaries in the acquisition of these artifacts, it's a major problem that these are the people own such a vast collection of important history.