scholarly journals Who Owns Space?

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan William O'Brien
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Science Fiction ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Minor Planets ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Outer Space Treaty ◽  
Resource Exploration ◽  
The Right

Space mining is no longer a figment of fringe science fiction. Due to the recent passage of the Space Resource Exploration and Utilization Act of 2015 (SREU Act), U.S. domestic space companies now have a semblance of legislative backing to launch commercial resource acquisition ventures in space. Previously, such companies floundered as capital from investors was reasonably sparse. Uncertainty created by the previously untested Outer Space Treaty (OST) perpetuated worry surrounding the existence of private property rights in space. With the passage of the recent SREU Act, many domestic worries were dismissed by the definitive granting of commercial property rights to U.S. citizens, yet equally many worries continue to surround the legitimacy of the SREU Act itself, as certain legal experts both inside and outside the U.S. argue the Act to be a violation of U.S. international obligations. In contrast to the OST, the SREU Act explicitly grants Americans the right to hold and obtain material resources from celestial bodies such as asteroids and minor planets. This paper examines the implications of such a legal gray area by examining the extent to which select clauses of the OST may or may not conflict with such definitive legislation. Ultimately, it is concluded that the issue is far from settled, as the existence of celestial property rights may not presently be as clear as investors might hope.

scholarly journals Finders Keepers

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-229
Author(s):  
Jose A. Martin del Campo
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Regulatory Body ◽  
Space Race ◽  
Space Law ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
New Space ◽  
Suitable Framework ◽  
The Right

Current space law is unclear as to whether private entities may claim possession of resources extracted from their endeavors in outer space. The lack of certainty prevents private entities from entirely investing in infrastructure and capabilities to access new deposits of resources due to the depletion of minerals and resources on Earth. The establishment of a new space regime devoid of non-appropriation principles found in international law is necessary to motivate private entities to invest the capital in extracting and transporting space resources back to Earth. This Comment seeks to understand how the current framework of space law impacts the property rights of private entities and their claim to resources in space. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibited the claiming of property by sovereign nations. However, the concept of private entities now having the capability to extract resources from outer space has reignited the issue of property rights in outer space. With resources becoming scarcer or priced out of the market, the solution of mining these resources from celestial bodies has caused a new space race. Past multilateral agreements have dealt with similar discoveries such as the polymetallic nodules on the ocean floor; however, these agreements led to disputes as to ownership and the rights to extract said resources. With little to no support from the industrialized nations, the structure of any new regime must ensure access for the benefit of humankind. The benefit of allowing these private entities the right to claim mined resources must be weighed against potential drawbacks in order to create a framework that balances the interest of the free market with that of the common heritage principle. In determining that a suitable framework fails to guide a new space regime, this Comment proposes that a new governing body comprising a rotation of space-faring and nonspacefaring nations act as a regulatory body for the interest of all of humankind.

scholarly journals Igneous Rock Associations 24. Near-Earth Asteroid Resources: A Review

2019 ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Liam Robert John Innis ◽  
Gordon R. Osinski
Keyword(s):  
Outer Space ◽  
Target Selection ◽  
Platinum Group Elements ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Resource Concentration ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Outer Space Treaty ◽  
Platinum Group ◽  
Key Resources ◽  
Near Earth Asteroids

The extraction of natural resources located beyond Earth to create products can be described as space resource utilization (SRU). SRU is under active investigation in both the public and private sectors. Near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) are particularly promising early SRU targets due to their relative proximity and enrichments in two key resources: water and platinum group elements (PGEs). Water can be used to create rocket propellant, making it the only resource with significant demand given the current nascent state of the space market. Platinum group elements are valuable enough that their import to the Earth market is potentially economical, making them the other prospective resource in the current embryonic state of SRU. While it is possible to retrieve material from a NEA, doing so on an economical scale will require significant developments in areas such as autonomous robotics and propulsion technology. A parameterization accounting for asteroid size, resource concentration, and accessibility yields just seven and three potentially viable NEA targets in the known population for water and PGEs, respectively. A greater emphasis on spectral observation of asteroids is required to better inform target selection for early prospecting spacecraft. A further complication is the lack of a legal precedent for the sale of extraterrestrial resources. The Outer Space Treaty prohibits the appropriation of celestial bodies but makes no explicit reference to their resources while the U.S.A. and Luxembourg have passed legislation entitling their citizens to own and sell space resources. Whether these laws are a matter of clarification or contradiction is the matter of some debate. RÉSUMÉL'extraction de ressources naturelles situées au-delà de la Terre pour créer des produits peut être décrite comme une utilisation des ressources spatiales (URS). L’URS est actuellement examinée à la fois dans les secteurs public et privé. Les astéroïdes proches de la Terre (NEA) sont des cibles URS particulièrement prometteuses en raison de leur proximité relative et de leur enrichissement en deux ressources clés : l’eau et les éléments du groupe du platine (EGP). L'eau peut être utilisée pour créer des agents de propulsion pour vaisseaux spatiaux, ce qui en fait la seule ressource pour laquelle la demande est importante compte tenu de l’émergence du marché spatial actuel. Les EGP sont suffisamment précieux pour que leur importation sur le marché terrestre soit potentiellement économique, ce qui en fait l’autre ressource potentielle étant donné l’état embryonnaire actuel de l’URS. Bien qu'il soit possible de récupérer des matériaux sur un NEA, le faire à une échelle économique nécessitera des développements importants dans des domaines tels que la robotique autonome et la technologie de propulsion. Un paramétrage tenant compte de la taille des astéroïdes, de la concentration des ressources et de l'accessibilité conduit à seulement sept et trois cibles NEA parmi la population connue, potentiellement exploitables pour l'eau et les EGP, respectivement. Il est nécessaire de mettre davantage l'accent sur l'observation spectrale des astéroïdes afin de mieux documenter la sélection des cibles pour les premiers vaisseaux prospecteurs. L'absence de précédent juridique pour la vente de ressources extraterrestres est une complication supplémentaire. Le Traité sur l’espace interdit l’appropriation des corps célestes mais ne fait aucune référence explicite à leurs ressources, tandis que les États-Unis et le Luxembourg ont adopté une législation autorisant leurs citoyens à posséder et à vendre des ressources spatiales. Que ces lois fassent l’objet de clarification ou de contradiction est sujet à débat.

Space Law and Weapons in Space

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sa'id Mosteshar
Keyword(s):  
Outer Space ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Difficulty ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Outer Space Treaty ◽  
Space Weapons ◽  
Definition Of

Although legal principles to govern space were discussed as early as the mid-1950s, they were not formalized until the Outer Space Treaty (OST) 1967 was adopted and came into force. The OST establishes a number of principles affecting the placement of weapons in outer space. In particular it provides that “the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes” and prohibits the testing of any types of weapons on such bodies. More generally the OST forbids the placement of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in outer space. In addition there are a number of disarmament treaties and agreements emanating from the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs and the Conference on Disarmament that are relevant to weapons in space. Although the disarmament provisions and international humanitarian laws place some restrictions on the use or manner of use of space weapons, none prohibit space weaponization. The absence of such prohibition is not due to many attempts over the years to prevent an arms race in space. Notable among these are Prevention of an Arms Race in Space Draft Treaty and the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Space Draft Treaty. In considering the laws affecting space weapons a fundamental question that arises is what constitutes a weapon and does its placement in space breach the requirement that outer space be used exclusively for peaceful purposes? As an example, does a satellite used to control and direct an armed drone breach the peaceful use provision of the OST? There may be risks that without international norms governments and substate groups may acquire and use armed drones in ways that threaten regional stability, laws of war, and the role of domestic rule of law in decisions to use force. Given their orbital velocity, any object in space could be a weapon with capability to destroy a satellite or other space object. There is also a growing population of dual-use satellites with military as well as civilian applications. These present great difficulty in arriving at a workable definition of a space weapon in the formulation of a generally acceptable treaty. In addition, there are divergent views of the meaning of peaceful use. Some, in particular the United States, consider the meaning to be “nonaggressive” rather than “nonmilitary.”

PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO THE FRUITS OF ONE'S LABOR: A NOTE ON ADAM SMITH'S JURISPRUDENCE

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
AMOS WITZTUM
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Ownership ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Ethical Position ◽  
The Right ◽  
Smith Theory

This paper provides further evidence to the argument that Smith' theory of justice did not follow the natural justice school and that subsequently the ethical position on acquiring private property is not independent of the effects which such acquisition may have on the property-less individuals. I will show that the justification for private ownership is based on “reasonable expectations” which owners of assets have with regard to the fruits of the asset. The expectation to subsist through the use of one's natural assets is equally reasonable. This is not to say that Smith believed that society should equally distribute income. But it does mean that the acquisition of private property must not interfere with the rights of individuals to subsist. Consequently, distribution is clearly an important part of Smith's conception of justice.

scholarly journals The problem of the actual replacement of private property rights by rights of use in Ukraine: status and prospects

2020 ◽  
pp. 57-64
Author(s):  
L.D. Rudenko ◽  
O.L. Orlov
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Democratic Polity ◽  
Main Instrument ◽  
Private Owner ◽  
The Right ◽  
Real Type ◽  
Legal Grounds ◽  
Direct Threat

The article has substantiated the process of the de facto replacement of the right of private property by the rights of use; distinguished stages in the development of the private property institution in Ukraine; specified grounds for the emergence and termination of the right of private property and the rights of use; refined sense and scope of responsibility of the private owner and the holder;identified the main instrument of substitution of the right of private property by the rights of use; traced preconditions for passing inconsistent judgements on property protection by the ECHR; and analyzed possible consequences of further substitution of the right of private property by the rights of use. Regard to findings of the study it was considered about instability of the private property institution; identity between unofficial grounds for the termination of the right of private property and unofficial grounds for the emergence of the rights of use; existence of the direct threat to owner status in Ukraine; absence of legal grounds for increasing the sense of owner responsibility, including taxation of the private property; transformation of the feudal law into the modern rights of use combined with the right of possession; possibility of establishing a real type of polity and prospects for its development by ways of regulation of the ownership relations. The article has also considered about creating preconditions for restoring the feudal law and replacing democratic polity by a monarchy in Ukraine and other countries owing to severe restrictions on the right of private property, above all, through taxation of the privateproperty, and its de facto replacementby the rights of use.

The Outer Space Treaty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Daniel Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Space Debris ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
National Level ◽  
Telecommunications Industry ◽  
The United States ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Small Satellites ◽  
National Space ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Outer Space Treaty

Negotiated at the United Nations and in force since 1967, the Outer Space Treaty has been ratified by over 100 countries and is the most important and foundational source of space law. The treaty, whose full title is “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” governs all of humankind’s activities in outer space, including activities on other celestial bodies and many activities on Earth related to outer space. All space exploration and human spaceflight, planetary sciences, and commercial uses of space—such as the global telecommunications industry and the use of space technologies such as position, navigation, and timing (PNT), take place against the backdrop of the general regulatory framework established in the Outer Space Treaty. A treaty is an international legal instrument which balances rights and obligations between states, and exists as a kind of mutual contract of shared understandings, rights, and responsibilities between them. Negotiated and drafted during the Cold War era of heightened political tensions, the Outer Space Treaty is largely the product of efforts by the United States and the USSR to agree on certain minimum standards and obligations to govern their competition in “conquering” space. Additionally, the Outer Space Treaty is similar to other treaties, including treaties governing the high seas, international airspace, and the Antarctic, all of which govern the behavior of states outside of their national borders. The treaty is brief in nature and only contains 17 articles, and is not comprehensive in addressing and regulating every possible scenario. The negotiating states knew that the Outer Space Treaty could only establish certain foundational concepts such as freedom of access, state responsibility and liability, non-weaponization of space, the treatment of astronauts in distress, and the prohibition of non-appropriation of celestial bodies. Subsequent treaties were to refine these concepts, and national space legislation was to incorporate the treaty’s rights and obligations at the national level. While the treaty is the cornerstone in the regulation of activities in outer space, today the emergence of new issues that were not contemplated at the time of its creation, such as small satellites and megaconstellations, satellite servicing missions, the problem of space debris and the possibility of space debris removal, and the use of lunar and asteroid resources, all stretch the coherence and continuing adequacy of the treaty, and may occasion the need for new governance frameworks.

Main Contents and Comment on the 1967 Outer Space Treaty

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-19
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Moon ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Outer Space Treaty

This chapter introduces the ratification by member states and main contents of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (Title: Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies). Furthermore, the author explains the reason it the contents of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty should be amended. The treaty was opened for signature in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union on 27 January 1967, and entered into force on 10 October 1967. As of June 2020, 110 countries are parties to the treaty, while another 23 have signed the treaty but have not completed ratification.

CONDITIONS FOR THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVATE PROPERTY: DE YURE / DE FACTO

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 31-39
Author(s):  
Alisher Borotov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the right to private property and the conditions for its implementation, which explains that ownership is not only a right, but also a duty, a responsibility. Therefore, Article 172 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan states that these conditions are specially normalized. And throughout the article, these terms are explained in de jure / de facto perspective.At the end of the article, the new version of the draft Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan provides suggestions for improving Article 198 of the "Conditions for the exercise of property rights".

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document