[chetan_v]

"The contract of sale contains a confidentiality provision that protects information relating to the buyer and price." Wow that sucks, would have been quite interesting to know how the government found a buyer and how much it was sold for.

[arthurcolle]

It's probably some crypto loon who will turn around and make it an NFT

[paulpauper]

and then 'sell' it for $70 million and no $ will change hands

[seriousquestion]

What would be the justification for making it private anyway? Shouldn't this be transparent?

[PragmaticPulp]

To prevent the buyer from becoming a target for crime.

If people know who has it, they might try to extort him or worse.

I don’t see any reason the information needs to be public.

[rchaud]

That would turn off a lot of buyers because it would bring undue attention. Buyers may not know the exact origin of stuff they're buying. A car for instance could formerly have belonged to a person you might not want to run into. A public record of that purchase however would make it a possible target not just for the original owner, but also any rivals he/she may have.

[Enginerrrd]

Well the notoriety of buying it didn't exactly help Shkreli's situation much, did it? If you want wealthy people to take an interest in buying it, it seems sensible.

[djbebs]

Presumably because shrekli purchased it under those conditions. He can't sell you the right to state the price because he doesn't own it.