Slashdot Mirror
Orbdev Files US Federal Suit Over Asteroid Claim
chongo writes "Orbital
Development has
filed
legal action against the United States by filing a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment in Federal Court.
After NASA's NEAR
probe landed
on the
asteroid
433 Eros,
Gregory W. Nemitz,
who
claims
to have owned the asteroid since the 3rd of March 2000,
sent NASA an $20 invoice for the
first 100 years of parking and storage fees.
NASA told him to "pound
sand".
OrbDev's
Eros
Project seeks to promote their ludicrous ideas about property rights in
space."
(yet).
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
http://history.nasa.gov/1967treaty.html
From Article II:
"Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means."
-----
show me salvation, and i'll hate it.
Now, I'm getting curious - how do one 'establish a claim' on a piece of rock that's orbiting the sun? If it's just a cause of calling dids and grabbing what you can, I think I'ld like to claim ownership of Europa (no, not the continent, the ice covered rock thats up there). Not only can I charge NASA for parking there, but if they do find life, I can sue those organisms for not paying rent as well...
Seriously thought, someone should brief these fellows on the international agreements that relates to 'Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies'. Pay particular attention to the second paragraph in article I, qouted in full;
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies.
In short, if NASA or anyone else can land somewhere, they are free to do so. End of story.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
ok the you own all this was tried by the pope with respect to spain and portugal in the new world. the thing is no one else respected that so, if you wanted the mississippi, you had to deal with the french who did walk (or sail) all the way there and establish forts to keep off the others (read english).
If you want a good story about soverignty take a look at the early history of the royal canadian mounted police. It might not seem like a logical place to start, but that is why they were created.
The guy claims that treaty does not apply, because he is not trying to annex the asteroid as part of a nation. He claims it as personal property, like a house or a wristwatch.
"3. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person."
I'm not natural, you insensitive clod!
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Also, if you do look at the cited documents on the lunatic's website, they're misaligned scans of court documents. But this isn't simple incompetence, it's encryption! "These document scans are formated to hinder text capture. No portion may be saved or copied for any purpose whatsoever."
Or, they could just quote the UN Treaty banning property ownership in space...
Article 11.3 of the 1979 Moon Treaty:
Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person. The placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on or below the surface of the moon, including structures connected with its surface or subsurface, shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the subsurface of the moon or any areas thereof. The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the international regime referred to in paragraph 5 of this ARTICLE.
That gets rid of the Lunar Embassy's claim on the moon.
Article 6 of the Outer Space Treaty:
States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compliance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.
Whoops, turns out there's no loophole!
Why do people in the Americas have property as we know it today? Go back 500 years. You have native American tribes that claim land and defend it against other tribes. Then you have the British, Spanish, French move in and either purchase the land from the tribes, or take it from them by force and then defend it from other invaders. (Mind you, I'm not saying what they did was right.) Then you have the future Americans get together and say 'piss off' to the British, and they defend the land against the British. Now we're at the point where the government owns anything within the perimeter they defend. The government and individuals then sell that land as they sees fit.
So a claim has never been about what you say. When there is no government, as is the case in space, it's all about what you buy from someone else or what you can take by force. In the end, it all comes down to force. So until this guy flies out there to Eros and starts fending off invaders, NASA or anyone else can park whatever it wants on Eros.
--
Luck is just skill you didn't know you had.
versus conventional property rights, NASA has the better claim since they are actually "using" the asteroid whereas Orbdev hasn't done anything but claim it.
Orbdev is based on the feudal property notion that simply riding around a piece of land for a day gives you some legitimate claim to it.
This is NOT a correct or workable concept of property.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Read the f'ing Constitution.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
I'm a lawyer (well I'm taking a business law class in college) so I think this really boils down to the difference btwn "probes" and "shells". Should it be determined by the courts that NASA is mainly in the business of firing shells at planets; ie: all Mars missions, then the offended party has a case, however, if it be determined by the courts that NASA is actually in the business of sending out "probes" then we have a real case on our hands. Should it be determined that NASA was not in the business of claiming the astroid, but rather trying to destroy the astertoid as prior conduct implies then the actionable party will prevail.