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."
What is the fine this sort of a thing?
Gregory W. Nemitz
Address: 8301-252 Mission Gorge Road, Santee, Calif. 92071 USA
Tel: 775-450-6144
Fax: 413-460-6480
Email: gnemitz@orbdev.com
Of course, this is all public information, and obviously I'm not encouraging anyone to contact or harrass Mr. Nemitz.
In a countersuit to be filed tomorrow, NASA plans to subpoena Orbdev officials under a claim that Orbdev owes NASA $38 million in parking fees for hitching their asteroid to NASA's probe.
An unnamed NASA official claims, "It's [Orbdev's] gravity keeping the thing there. God knows our probe has other places it could be going if it didn't have to drag along this dead weight."
Eros could not be reached for comment.
Kevin Fox
Dear OrbDev,
Department policy forbids payment of parking tickets that have not first been duly affixed to the windshield of the vehicle. Please let us know when you have done so.
Love,
NASA
The right to own property is the foremost right of every person and should be defended above all these other "rights"...
Thank you Ayn Rand.
Now let's get real. Property is not inherent. Moreover, the subject of what can and cannot be property is a limited one; slavery is a form of property that was once legally recognized but is no longer in most parts of the world.
What is inherent is life and liberty. Working from these one can derive certain forms of legitimate property, i.e., a presumed legal right to exclusive possession of things one creates, lest he or she be deprived of the labor (life and liberty interest) invested in its creation.
Now tell me, sir, when and how did you make the asteroid you now claim to own?
Peace and love, y'all
Besides, even if he did "own" it, does the paltry price he is charging just a sign that he's only trying to be a pain in NASA's ass?
Nope. I bet he's trying to get a gov't agency to "recognize" his claim by paying the invoice.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
From Article 1
From Article 11In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
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.
I've already had dealings with Mr. Nemitz ...
... since this couldn't be done, the bill was cancelled.
As to aliens: without proof that they exist, he refuses to care. After all, without the indians/natives, who would have cared that europeans were invading a new continent? Therefore, he'll care when aliens actually complain that they owned it first. And then, he'll fight them. So he says.
As to his claim: he has declared that the UN treaty banning governments from laying claim to land in space only applies to governments, and that it has no bearing on individuals. The government's right to do anything comes from citizens, so this is the 'correct' order of things.
As to not laying foot on it: anything not already owned is deemed to be up for grabs to the first to think of it. A registry has been set up to allow people to state their claim against stars, planets, and other bodies floating in space. Our sun is already claimed, and I seem to remember there being a story about an exchange between the owner of the moon (or was it eros?) and that of the sun -- a bill was sent for the energy used, owner of the other body responded he didn't like the service and wanted it discontinued
Effectively, these people believe that their claim to these new territories is founded purely and simply in the lack of laws preventing it. Brute force will be required, they think, to say otherwise -- and they're already planning a galactic-level government (in the same shape as the UN) to help legitimize their claims and instruct counter-claims (and enforce their prior ownership, apparently.) Earth is outside its scope, for lack of proper representation. Everyone else is welcome to join, if they're a non-earth land (or gas?) owner.
Arguments will boil down to "but nothing says I can't, so, ha!" And that's where we ended the thread.
To Gregory W. Nemitz
Re: Amnesty for unauthorized use of service
I, Helios Apollo, owner of a main sequence, spectral class G2 star of radius 696,000 km, situated approximately 1.5e8 kilometers from the planet Earth and known in the English language as "the Sun", have been advised that you may have been using the service known as "Sunshine", a stream of photons emitted by the above-mentioned star, for the purposes of visual navigation. Since, according to my records, you are not a licensed user of the service, I am asking that you account for your usage of the service beginning from 0h00 UTC January 1, 2000 according to either of the following billing plans and remit any amounts that may be payable.
The Photon Count Plan. Count all photons emitted from the surface of the Sun of wavelength greater than 395 nanometers and less than 695 nanometers that directly impinge upon your person and all of your belongings including real estate, then multiply by the factor 4.0 times ten to the minus twenty-five to yield the amount in cents of U.S. currency.
The Earth Residency Plan. Only 36 cents per day of use. Use shall be deemed to occur in a 24 hour period if at least one photon would have been used under the Photon Count Plan.
To be exempted from accounting for use of the service, please submit a copy of Certificate of Vampire Status.
"Do you have a flag? If you don't have a flag it's not yours."
This reminds me of that Eddie Izzard routine where the Europeans are seizing land from the Indians. After telling them repeatedly that they're not a nation and it's not their land unless they have a flag, the Indians go off and make themselves a flag. When they come back the English say... "Good - do you have a gun?" The Indians are... "Ooooh - you need a GUN and a flag." Sorry but this chap can wave around whatever bits of paper (and make as many flags) as he likes, but unless he has a 'gun' with which to threaten the government, it isn't going to work.
Of course, Terran property rights ultimately come down to who has the most guns too, but people forget that (unless they're Iraqi.)
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
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!
Whoops, turns out there's no loophole!
There is, actually, one loophole: Any government with a sufficiently large army can unilaterally abrogate any treaty they wish.
It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.