Passage Summary: Salvador argues that even if your specific purchase is of an old item, you are still responsible for the ripple effect that leads someone else to buy a poached item.

Conclusion: People who want to protect elephants should avoid buying any ivory, including antique pieces.

Reasoning: Purchasing antique ivory reduces the available supply for other buyers, which indirectly pushes those buyers toward the new ivory market, thereby increasing demand for poached ivory.

Analysis: Salvador’s argument is built on the idea of indirect moral responsibility. He isn't saying that buying a 100-year-old piano key kills an elephant today; he's saying it sets off a chain reaction in the market that eventually leads to a dead elephant. To justify this, we need a principle that says you shouldn't do something if it indirectly encourages others to do something harmful. It’s the ultimate 'if you give a mouse a cookie' logic applied to international conservation ethics.