Slashdot Mirror


Whose Laws Apply On the ISS?

Hugh Pickens writes "Whose laws apply if astronauts from different countries get into a fight, make a patentable discovery, or damage equipment belonging to another country while on the International Space Station? According to the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, ratified by 98 nations, states have legal jurisdiction within spacecraft registered to them. When the space station was assembled from modules supplied by the United States, Russia, Japan and the European Space Agency (ESA), partners rejected an initial proposal that US law should prevail throughout the space station. "It was agreed that each state registers its own separate elements, which means that you now have a piece of the US annexed to a piece of Europe annexed to a piece of Japan in outer space, legally speaking," said Dr Frans von der Dunk of the International Institute of Air and Space Law at the University of Leiden. So what happens if a crime is committed in space? "If somebody performs an activity which may be considered criminal, it is in the first instance his own country which is able to exercise jurisdiction," Dr. von der Dunk added."

344 comments

  1. Dr. von der Dunk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Didn't he invent the "Coffee and Donut" combination?

    1. Re:Dr. von der Dunk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he got the idea at the beach.

      Franz von der Dunking Nuts.

  2. We clearly need by dnormant · · Score: 5, Funny

    a Federation.

    1. Re:We clearly need by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bah. Only a strong central government can calm the chaos. We need an Empire.

    2. Re:We clearly need by presarioD · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nahhh, only benevolent and wise entities can lead the sheep. We need overlords...

      --
      Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
    3. Re:We clearly need by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      So that's how freedom ends... to thunderous applause.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    4. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean that we would be governed by Brannigan's Law?

    5. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I, for one, will welcome them...

    6. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      ...Which is like Brannigan's love - hard and fast.

    7. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Do this Empire thing and we will rebel.

    8. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. We can assimilate them. Resistance is futile.

    9. Re:We clearly need by operagost · · Score: 1

      Unless it's a teen movie, in which case it starts with a slow clap.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    10. Re:We clearly need by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      You pull a Picard and call the Sheliak. That'll buy some time for the lawyers, too. They LOVE billable hours. They'll be richer than 10x5^523 BAZILLION quatloos.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    11. Re:We clearly need by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who, due to the mention of chaos, thought of the Warhammer 40k Empire instead of the Star Wars one? Though I'd prefer living under the Star Wars one.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    12. Re:We clearly need by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nonsense. Space has already been claimed by RMS as an inferior Emacs process.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    13. Re:We clearly need by BelDion · · Score: 2, Funny

      Spawning.

      --

      I am BelDion's .Sig; Who the hell is Jack?
    14. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Just be sure to spawn enough of them...

    15. Re:We clearly need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but HOW do you welcome them? Covered in grits, perhaps?

    16. Re:We clearly need by Hott+of+the+World · · Score: 1

      Clearly not thinking things through.

      We require more vespian gas!

      --
      | - | - |
    17. Re:We clearly need by Spikeles · · Score: 1

      Star wars? I thought Empire as in the Romulan or Klingon Empires

      --
      I don't need to test my programs.. I have an error correcting modem.
  3. If astronauts fight.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..the winner makes the law. Duh.

    1. Re:If astronauts fight.. by cstdenis · · Score: 1

      Just like wars down on earth.

      --
      1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
    2. Re:If astronauts fight.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting. In that case, pay the Russians $1,000,000 or however much their going rate is for a trip up to the ISS. Kick everyone's ass. Take over the ISS in your name. Only problem is getting back down or supplies up.

  4. Hmmmm by joeytmann · · Score: 1

    I think some one has way to much time on their hands.

    --
    Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
  5. Fingers crossed. by Asm-Coder · · Score: 3, Funny

    I had hoped that astronauts would be above this, but, nobody seems to be above anything nowadays.

    1. Re:Fingers crossed. by darkonc · · Score: 0

      I had hoped that astronauts would be above this, but, ... I've got two words for you: "Diaper driving".

      Astronauts are, like the rest of us, very human with human foibles. They're no less likely to mess up than we are -- it's just that the results of such errors are multiplied by (if nothing else) the intense publicity (and, now, a legal limbo).

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    2. Re:Fingers crossed. by mackil · · Score: 0

      I'm with you on hoping that they are, but remember Lisa Nowak.

    3. Re:Fingers crossed. by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      They are.... by about 150 miles.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:Fingers crossed. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      Well don't worry, because we can always trust the judgment of a guy whose name Dutch for "Doctor of-the-dark".

    5. Re:Fingers crossed. by monoqlith · · Score: 1, Funny

      Which raises the (perhaps even more important) question: If an astronaut soils his/her Depends, which country is most responsible for changing it?

    6. Re:Fingers crossed. by mstahl · · Score: 1

      It's a pun. "Above". Get it?

    7. Re:Fingers crossed. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Well, its all relative I suppose.

    8. Re:Fingers crossed. by homebrewmike · · Score: 1

      Want me to come down there and kick your ass?

    9. Re:Fingers crossed. by VolciMaster · · Score: 1
      ... ummmm....

      aren't astronauts *above* most everything?

  6. Crimes in space by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Funny

    If a crime is committed in space, we need to execute a nice antique trial-by-fire... if they survive decompression, they must be innocent. If not, they're guilty. It's foolproof!

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    1. Re:Crimes in space by adz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wrong way round. You don't want innocent people getting upset because you decompressed them. So the innocent ones are the ones who die (besides, you're a bit of a freak if you survive decompression).

    2. Re:Crimes in space by SgtPepperKSU · · Score: 1

      Ah, but then you have the deaths of innocent people on your hands. If death==guilt then anyone you killed must have deserved it. And, if anyone survives, they are "a bit of a freak" (as you put it), so no one will listen to them anyway.

      What, you expect truth to trump convenience?

    3. Re:Crimes in space by zx75 · · Score: 1

      Yes, except you have that backwards.

      If they survive decompression, they must be guilty! If not, they're innocent.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    4. Re:Crimes in space by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      A witch!

    5. Re:Crimes in space by idontgno · · Score: 4, Funny

      What else floats in microgravity?

      Apples!
      Churches!
      Lead! Lead!
      Mud!
      Small rocks!

      A duck...

      Correct!

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    6. Re:Crimes in space by Cedric+Tsui · · Score: 4, Informative

      No No. It is clearly the other way around.
      The witch trials for instance. Witches float, so you tie the accused witch up to ensure she can't swim (because that would add a a second variable of uncertainty) and toss her into the nearest creek. If she floats, and is a which, you then haul her over to the town square to be burned. If she sinks and drowns... An unfortunate casualty of the justice system.

    7. Re:Crimes in space by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That's backwards.
      If the die they are innocent, if they live they must be possessed by the devil. Becasue you would need magical power to survive the ordeal.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Crimes in space by Mercano · · Score: 1

      You know, an astronaut weighs the same as a duck in space.

      --
      #include <signature.h>
    9. Re:Crimes in space by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, an astronaut weighs the same as a duck in space.

      Actually this is a popular misconception. A few hundred kilometres up the acceleration due to gravity is not much different than here on the Earth's surface. The difference is that the ISS is in freefall you you get apparent weightlessness - effectively all the objects are in the same orbit around the Earth and since orbital velocity is independent of mass it gives an impression of weightlessness. So actually an astronaut still weighs more than a duck in space but is unaware of this because they are in the same orbit. For true weightlessness you have to go a long, long way away.

      Sorry that was probably more physics than you wanted to know but this is Slashdot!

    10. Re:Crimes in space by hitmark · · Score: 1

      decompression can be survived, for a short while.

      i think its the acute hypothermia issues that will kill you, not the decompression in itself...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    11. Re:Crimes in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite true, I've seen it happen.

    12. Re:Crimes in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and witches.

    13. Re:Crimes in space by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      Weight is a measure of the acceleration of your mass due to gravity relative to another mass.

      So, in the ISS I'd say you are weightless relative to the ISS... and so is the duck. As a frame of reference the ISS is more important to a station occupant than the Earth. You are NOT, however, massless, and inertia is a bugger.

    14. Re:Crimes in space by jsiren · · Score: 1
      I thought it was like the witchcraft trials: throw the suspect in water. If they survive, they're guilty and will be burned (once dried out); if they drown, they were innocent. In this case, just throw the suspect in space. If they survive, they're guilty and can be left outside. If they die, they were obviously innocent...


      (Captcha: abysses.)

      --
      Usage: km/h for speed (kilometers per hour); kph for very slow impulses (kilopond hours).
    15. Re:Crimes in space by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Informative

      Weight is a measure of the acceleration of your mass due to gravity relative to another mass.

      Sorry but this is very wrong. Using your definition then since all object accelerate equally under gravity all objects would have the same weight which is clearly not correct!

      So, in the ISS I'd say you are weightless relative to the ISS... and so is the duck.

      Weight is a force caused by gravity which is proportional to mass (hence the equal accelerations). Since in the ISS you still feel the gravitational pull of the Earth you still have a weight. The best illustration of this is that you are going round in a roughly circular orbit. To follow such an orbit there must be a force acting on the space station and the source of that force is gravity hence you have a weight.

      Perhaps a better way to think of it is imagine you are in a lift at the top of a tower block and someone suddenly cuts the cable and you start to fall. In the brief moments of life left to you you are clearly not weightless but instead are in freefall so you get the illusion of weightlessness. The ISS is just like that...only the freefall lasts a lot longer!

    16. Re:Crimes in space by Ihlosi · · Score: 3, Informative
      i think its the acute hypothermia issues that will kill you, not the decompression in itself...



      Um, no. It's lack of oxygen that you'll die from. You'll lose consciousness after about 15 to 20 seconds (due to deoxygenation of your blood on your lungs) and probably don't want to be resuscitated after more than 2 minutes unless you enjoy an existence at the mental level of a daisy.

    17. Re:Crimes in space by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Oh it was better than that - if she sank and drowned then she was innocent and her soul would be accepted into heaven.

      It really was win-win. Well, apart from for the women.

    18. Re:Crimes in space by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      Yes, but...

      A few problems with that system.

      Witches may float, but so do ducks. If she looks like a duck, she must be a witch, the same argument applies in reverse - is she doesn't look like a duck then she can't possibly be a witch (and therefore won't float either). Given this, also consider that wood while being an excellent fuel for combustion, also floats - if she looks like a tree then chances are she'll float, therefore she's a duck hence a witch. She'll also burn, so be sure to keep those torches away from the village ducks.

      With respectful thanks to the Monty's Python.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    19. Re:Crimes in space by laejoh · · Score: 0

      You don't need to drown them (initially), you can weight them! It's duck typing in action! If they weight less or the same as a duck it means they can float and thus, are, a witch! If they weight more they'd sink and are thus, not a witch!

      Come on people, it's all the pickaxe book!

    20. Re:Crimes in space by BlakJak-ZL1VMF · · Score: 1

      Question appears to be answered: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_147.html

      Its a little more complex than lack of oxygen - the oxygen in your system actually expands as it turns to a vapour (boiling point drops as pressure drops, remember?) and whilst its recoverable if caught quickly enough , it doesn't sound very pleasant...

      --
      -.-. --.-
    21. Re:Crimes in space by grgyle · · Score: 1

      No, his definition was trying to verbalize F=ma, and he is quite correct. The key is his "relative to another mass". For example, your weight standing on the moon is less, due to the smaller mass of the moon.

      Weight is a measure of force. On the IIS you have a cancelation of forces: the centripetal acceleration of the orbit exactly cancels the acceleration of gravity, leaving you with a delta of zero--a stable orbit, weightlessness. You are conflating 'weight' and 'mass'.

      In your elevator freefall example, it isn't an illusion of weightlessness, it *is* weightlessness. Your mass however does not change.

      --
      ----- And all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks, with one word...UNLESS.
    22. Re:Crimes in space by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      On the IIS you have a cancelation of forces: the centripetal acceleration of the orbit exactly cancels the acceleration of gravity, leaving you with a delta of zero--a stable orbit, weightlessness.

      Sorry but this is just wrong. Force and acceleration are not the same. They are related by F=ma in classical physics but that does not mean they are the same. This is a very common mistake that I see from students in my first year physics lectures so it is a very easy misconception to have.

      What F=ma tells us is that forces cause accelerations. In the case of an orbiting object the force of gravity causes the object to follow a circular path i.e. the force of gravity is causing and acceleration such that the object follows an orbit. If there were no force of gravity the ISS would move in a straight line. Since everything is accelerating at the same rate it appears that there is no force acting but appearances can be deceptive.

      You are conflating 'weight' and 'mass'.

      No I am not - but you are confusing force and acceleration.

  7. War of the Roses in space? by burtosis · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Whoever owns the rights to the module you have to enter/leave by is going to win this one.

    What do you mean I can't have more air?

    1. Re:War of the Roses in space? by lorenzino · · Score: 1

      Mod up parent funny! :)

    2. Re:War of the Roses in space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Are the fights that serious on the ISS? I understand if we have working colonies in orbit or on the moon we'll need to have a codified system. Did I miss something and all of the sudden the ISS is Thunderdome now?

    3. Re:War of the Roses in space? by drjoe1e6 · · Score: 1

      Can't we get beyond Thunderdome?

      --
      Lose = not win ...... Loose = not tight
  8. I know ... by ubrgeek · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let Sealand claim it :)

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
    1. Re:I know ... by greyline · · Score: 1

      More like...Spaceland

    2. Re:I know ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like some awful overpriced theme park with mouse ears plastered all over it.

    3. Re:I know ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should launch up our own satellite with a file server!

      RIAA and MPAA will never catch us now. =]

  9. crime? what about birth? by rucs_hack · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wait till the first child gets born. They might be the first people able to claim multinationality, or perhaps to be able to drop the concept of nationality altogether.

    Ok, unlikely, but would it not rock?

    1. Re:crime? what about birth? by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Informative

      They might be the first people able to claim multinationality


      Actually, lots of people are able to claim more than one nationality as a result of birth; for instance, anyone born of a parent from one country that makes children of its citizens citizens by birth, that also:
      1) has their other parent a citizen of another country that does that, or
      2) is born in a country different than their parents country of citizenship, that makes people born in the country citizens by birth,
      Can claim birthright citizenship in more than one country. IIRC, some countries force such a person to make a choice of one or the other at adulthood or give up the claim. I don't really think the ISS, despite having bits of many countries in close proximity, really adds anything new in this regard.
    2. Re:crime? what about birth? by aktzin · · Score: 1

      Good point, but it might depend on the module where the baby is born and the parents' nationalities. In most cases a child automatically receives either or both parents' citizenship. For example, children of US diplomats or military personnel born abroad.

      I understand that when a child can claim more than one country, some nations allow dual citizenship while others require the person to choose one at age 18. And recently I read that Switzerland doesn't automatically grant Swiss citizenship to babies born there if their parents aren't citizens already. Could any of our friends from .ch confirm or correct this please?

      "Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." (Rush - "Territories" from the album "Power Windows")

      --
      Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
    3. Re:crime? what about birth? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm reasonably certain that both Germany's and Switzerland's citizenship laws work this way. In fact, there's a sizable Turkish population in Germany, many of whom have lived there for generations, but who don't have citizenship because Germany doesn't automatically grant it at birth. At least, that's the situation as I remember it. It's been a while since I lived there, and I was just a kid.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    4. Re:crime? what about birth? by darkonc · · Score: 1

      I have an ex-girlfriend with triple citizenship -- Us and Britain (which her parents were citizens of when she was born) and Canada (where she was born).

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    5. Re:crime? what about birth? by nebaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What citizenship can be claimed by people born on the high seas?

      --
      Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    6. Re:crime? what about birth? by vorpal22 · · Score: 1

      I myself have triple citizenship. I was born in the US when my mom and dad were down there temporarily (from Canada) while my dad did a postdoc. I received Canadian citizenship through my mother, and Dutch citizenship through my father, who was born in Holland.

      I fully plan on taking advantage of all three during my life.

    7. Re:crime? what about birth? by mortonda · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Probably the flag the are legally sailing under.

    8. Re:crime? what about birth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, if it was a pirate ship, Somalian... (ducks)

    9. Re:crime? what about birth? by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      I imagine the phrase "Die earth scum!" to become more common in the future.

    10. Re:crime? what about birth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Confirmed. Going out on a limb, I seem to remember that citizenship based on the soil on which one is born is the British-American tradition, whereas citizenship based on ancestry tends to be a continental one.

    11. Re:crime? what about birth? by DarkSarin · · Score: 1

      You don't happen to be darkonc's girlfriend do you?

      What, oh different 3 countries...unless one of you is lying.

      So, are you, or are you not Darkonc's girlfriend?

      Of course, this is Slashdot, so we have to guess that if you are not, then Darkonc is lying about having a girlfriend...unless there are pics, of course :)

      --
      "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
    12. Re:crime? what about birth? by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      By reason of its complications, would not pregnancy be grounds for removal from duty aboard the ISS? This would neatly eliminate the need for adjudicating citizenship. As for the USA modules, such could be considered an 'insular territory'. These are places where the Constitution does not always follow the Flag.

      More likely than not, there are some lawyers (with too much time on their hands) who are attempting to find the best jus soli/jus sanguinis citizenship mix for the present configuration of the ISS. The results may appear as a humor piece in a yet to be published law journal.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    13. Re:crime? what about birth? by crowbarsarefornerdyg · · Score: 1

      By reason of its complications, would not pregnancy be grounds for removal from duty aboard the ISS? This would neatly eliminate the need for adjudicating citizenship. As for the USA modules, such could be considered an 'insular territory'. These are places where the Constitution does not always follow the Flag.

      More likely than not, there are some lawyers (with too much time on their hands) who are attempting to find the best jus soli/jus sanguinis citizenship mix for the present configuration of the ISS. The results may appear as a humor piece in a yet to be published law journal.
      You're right, it probably would be grounds for removal. But then some scientist would get a wild hair up his arse and decide to determine the effect of weightlessness on the birth of a human being.
      --
      "Slapping lipstick on a pig does NOT make it Natalie Portman. Paris Hilton, maybe, but not Portman." - UncleTogie
    14. Re:crime? what about birth? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      I believe that in space they would automatically be citizens of the greys.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    15. Re:crime? what about birth? by mikkelm · · Score: 1

      What if you, like me, exclusively sail under the Jolly Roger?

    16. Re:crime? what about birth? by PetiePooo · · Score: 1

      By reason of its complications, would not pregnancy be grounds for removal from duty aboard the ISS? This would neatly eliminate the need for adjudicating citizenship.

      ... but not completely beyond the realm of possibilities.

      1. Female astronaut engages in pre-blastoff blastoff.
      2. Returning shuttle pulls another Columbia.
      3. Astronaut discovers Aunt Flo not visiting on her monthly schedule.
      4. Some sort of Soyuz disaster results in an extended ISS crew isolation.

      Voila: the first confirmed extra terrestrial being! Remember, the pill is only 99.9% effective. I personally know a couple who had a lovely little girl despite properly administered oral contraceptives.


      Oh yeah, I almost forgot:
      5. Profit!

    17. Re:crime? what about birth? by ross.w · · Score: 1

      Would suck to have Liberian citizenship just because you were born on an oil tanker.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    18. Re:crime? what about birth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please. triple citizenship is rare, but not *that* rare. I personally know 2 such people. In a community the size of slashdot there are at least hundreds, probably more.

    19. Re:crime? what about birth? by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Pre-launch activity, eh? Would not the occupation of astronaut be considered so unique in scope as to preclude such human activity? Would a reasonable individual conclude that part of the job would be to refrain from becoming pregnant before and/or during a mission? Even so, the thought of a controlled experiment involving the unborn in space would be replete with ethical concerns given the increased radiation doses alone.

      [Bracing for some comment involving Lisa Nowak...as coffee is spewed from mouth onto kbd and disp in laughter]

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    20. Re:crime? what about birth? by Smauler · · Score: 1

      You're not seriously suggesting that all female astronauts should not have sex prior to them going into space are you? Because, as others have pointed out, no form of contraception is flawless. Asking married women not to have sex with their husbands months before their mission is completely heartless, and I would think would be counterproductive too. Abstaining from sex within a previously sexually active relationship is difficult, and cannot be monitored either.

      Refraining from becoming pregnant is not as easy as it sounds. I know several people who were conceived while their parents were using very high percentage based contraception (no, not just the pill).

    21. Re:crime? what about birth? by KnuthKonrad · · Score: 1

      Soil based citizenship seems to be true for France as well.

      (Hearsay from a schoolmate with dual French/German citizenship from roughly 20 years ago:)If you're born on board a french plane (like an Air France flight), you're granted french citizenship.

    22. Re:crime? what about birth? by Amouth · · Score: 1

      well if she was born in Canada and her parents where Britain - then to have US citizenship she must have moved here and applied for that - which by us laws (if i remember correctly) requires you to denounce and relequish your other citizenships - so while the other countries might see her as a citizen - the US government will only view her has a US citizen..

      now if she was born in the US of Canadan citizens born in Britain then it would work where all three would reconize all three nationalitys for her..

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    23. Re:crime? what about birth? by darkonc · · Score: 1
      Her parents were US and British respectively.

      None of the countries has any problems with dual citizenship that is acquired by birth but none of them have any explicit rules about triple citizenship, so she checked on the parings ....

      • US<->British == OK
      • US<->Canada == OK
      • Canada<->British =OK
      So, it seems, that there's no problem with triple citizenship. (she did, however, have to do a good bit of other work to meet the full requirements of all the citizenships)
      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    24. Re:crime? what about birth? by Amouth · · Score: 1

      ahh so she got the US by blood.. the first post seemd as if both parents where British and i assumed that she imigrated into the US..

      sporry about that

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    25. Re:crime? what about birth? by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      The international law concept of diplomats could be applied to astronauts so that there is no legal monstrosities of potentially incompatible citizenship mixes upon birth in such locales.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  10. It's probably too much to ask, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not murder
    Do not lie
    Do not steal
    Treat others how you want to be treated
    etc.

    1. Re:It's probably too much to ask, but... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I think your fourth item nicely covers the others, including "etc".

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    2. Re:It's probably too much to ask, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then go hug a tree as soon as you return to earth, sing kumbaya, buy a hybrid car, donate all your twinkies to Sally Struthers for her starving third world chidren and live in peace and harmony till the end of time.

      Meanwhile the rest of us live in the real world.

    3. Re:It's probably too much to ask, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yay!

      now get on with some more astronauts gay porno footage

    4. Re:It's probably too much to ask, but... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Do not lie

      Do the astronauts have that little space up there that they may not even lie? :-)
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:It's probably too much to ask, but... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Golden Rule - Treat others as you want to be treated
      Platinum Rule - Treat others as *they* want to be treated

  11. I wonder.. by aevan · · Score: 2, Funny

    So when are the Dutch sending up the hydroponics section again?
    Still think be more amusing to have it be whoever you're currently flying over. "3-2-1-Not Legal!"

    Originally had thought it really didn't matter, seeing as they 'rigorously screen astronauts'...but after the Diaper Psycho incident, this might come to be of importance soon enough. Bugger of a wait for trial if something happens on a Mars mission though.

    1. Re:I wonder.. by delong · · Score: 1

      It isn't important only in criminal actions. It's most obviously, and more commonly, important for tort. Who is responsible when a section of space junk deorbits and falls on somebody's head? Or, who is responsible when an astronaut has an accident and injures him/herself on the space station? Who is responsible if one astronaut accidentally injures another on the space station? These aren't merely academic questions; they are the sort of legal questions that are important for individuals that may be hurt in space. These sorts of liability issues are particularly important for future commercial access to space.

  12. Who pays for the station? by usul294 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    The vast majority of the cost that goes into the space station is American. Launching the large components, doing the risky spacewalks, delivering personnel. Other countries build some of the components (science labs), and Russia provides supplies the station as well as delivers personnel. The risk and investment in the station though has primarily fallen to the American's. American law should be defacto onboard the station. However, with patentable materials, the organizations responsible for the research of the patent maintain patent rights, so this could include multiple governments. The American government fronts somewhere along the lines of 2/3 to 3/4 the cost of the station, so I think it makes sense that American law should be the precedent to go by.

    1. Re:Who pays for the station? by lorenzino · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Please mod parent flaim bait :) I mean, its called Interantional for one reason. Yeah American are paying .. but I guess they accepted to join , again, an International base.

    2. Re:Who pays for the station? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know about the budgetting? Could you please cite some reference claiming America pays 2/3 or 3/4 of the total cost?

    3. Re:Who pays for the station? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
      American law should be defacto onboard the station

      Oh great - are you proposing it should be legal to carry a gun on the ISS then?

      --
      politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    4. Re:Who pays for the station? by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain I know his reference.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    5. Re:Who pays for the station? by Detritus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why not? They already have a firearm on the Soyuz. It's part of their survival kit in case they land off-course and have to deal with unfriendly and hungry wildlife.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    6. Re:Who pays for the station? by timster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      That would be a pretty stupid thing to do -- the comment presents a reasonable argument. You can disagree but that doesn't suggest a flamebait mod.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    7. Re:Who pays for the station? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Why not?

      Why, because guns are evil, of course.

    8. Re:Who pays for the station? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      that would be AWESOME!

      Space Walker, Texas Space Ranger.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    9. Re:Who pays for the station? by Goobermunch · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the old golden rule!

      Them with the gold, makes the rules.

      --AC

    10. Re:Who pays for the station? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      This is somewhat off topic but makes me think of one of the quirks of Canada.

      While a lot of countries have strict laws limiting possession of guns, I recall reading that Canada *requires* light plane pilots flying over certain areas (or possibly anywhere in their airspace) to have a shotgun on board in case they crash in the wilderness. Not sure if this is actually true, but it makes sense that Soyuz would have firearms on board for the same reasons.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    11. Re:Who pays for the station? by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sure...
      And who was flying back and forth supplying the ISS after Columbia disaster? The Russians with their "outdated" and "commie-made" yet robust, reliable and simple enough spacecrafts. How many months did it take to find out the cause for the crash and a way to fix (not a good one though if you think about later open-space repairs) remaining overpriced and overgloried but also highly complex and not-so-reliable shuttles? Without "Progress" spacecrafts the ISS would join the "Mir" soon enough.

    12. Re:Who pays for the station? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who paid for those extra Soyuz Flights? Uncle Sam or Uncle Ivan? As a matter of fact the interesting thing is that Canada, one of the few participants in the ISS effort who is NOT funding their program on Uncle Sam's bank account gets left out in the cold with the inventions and such because there donation is the arm, where no one lives.

    13. Re:Who pays for the station? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Nobody forced America to pony up the cash and resources to contribute. Same goes for the Russia (who are the #2 contributer)

      To be honest it should be consider international space, and an ISS organization should be formed that governs the laws aboard the ISS. And run it like a military court. Everyone who boards ISS does so voluntarily so giving up some personal freedoms and right to streamline the process of dealing with visitors and station crew in a consistent and non-controversial manner seems like a good idea. a fair judicial system created from scratch is far more costly and difficult than a military tribunal with a committee of members elected by each member nation.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    14. Re:Who pays for the station? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No more or less legal than carrying one in a room with the walls lined with gas cans.

      In other words, sufficiently stupid that nobody who can pass the psychology tests for entering space would want to do it.

    15. Re:Who pays for the station? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Not sure about planes but in certain remote regions of Canada you are required to carry a firearm for self defense againist bears. It makes sense if your flying over those regions you would need the gun.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    16. Re:Who pays for the station? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're emphasizing too much on the little upside to Russia's contribution.
      The ISS is highly dependent on the Space Shuttle for construction of it. In fact only the Space Shuttle can deliver the heavy modules and supply containers. Russia's spacecraft pretty much just deliver personnel and the smaller supplies. After the Columbia disaster the ISS had to downgrade personnel from three astronauts to two and scientific activity was limited because of this. But it might not be a bad idea if the ISS was retired, NASA can spend the money elsewhere.

    17. Re:Who pays for the station? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Uhm... Yeah....

      If the US wants a space station under US jurisdiction, then they can make their own. Nothing stopping them, and they can certainly afford to.

      If they want to claim its international and get other countries involved then they'll have to compromise. The US has essentiall ygiven a gift to the international community. It's a very kind and thoughtful gift and we're all grateful, but now they've given it away they don't get to demand how it's used. Sorry. It's everyone's now.

    18. Re:Who pays for the station? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Why not? Because putting a hole through the wall would be a Bad Thing(tm).
    19. Re:Who pays for the station? by Detritus · · Score: 1

      It would just create a slow leak, nothing catastrophic. I'd be more worried about getting hit by a piece of orbital debris, which can have much more kinetic energy than a bullet.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    20. Re:Who pays for the station? by delong · · Score: 1

      a fair judicial system created from scratch is far more costly and difficult than a military tribunal with a committee of members elected by each member nation

      Both are far more costly and difficult than using each member state's existing judicial system. There's no need to create some international court for the ISS. The issue isn't whether somebody will be held liable; the issue is who's law controls which "somebody" will be liable.

    21. Re:Who pays for the station? by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      Let me guess... You are American (as in born in the USA), right?

    22. Re:Who pays for the station? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      It seems like a complicated system that could spark political controversy. It's not a problem now while the ISS program is small. But I suspect things will be different if we decide to keep 40+ people up in the air (that is decades away and completely off the current ISS roadmap).

      You're probably right, until someone says something in one module that violates law in another module. For example India's strict protection of intolerant speech against religion. It's obvious to those in a common law system that it really only matters where you physically are and not where you are heard, but that's not always compatible with other systems of law.

      I used to think astronauts are professionals, and could figure out these things themselves. But after the ordeal with the kidnapping attempts, lover's triangle with the American astronaut. And reading about various psychological tricks Russian and American mission control use to placate upset astronauts/cosmonauts, I'm not so sure they can be trusted to be professional 100% the time, 24/7.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    23. Re:Who pays for the station? by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      "unfriendly and hungry wildlife"

      Is this the new politically correct term for chechen separatists?

    24. Re:Who pays for the station? by delong · · Score: 1

      No, no, no, you misunderstand what's going on here. Each module doesn't wholesale import the entire domestic law of the "owning" State. The only issue is basically choice of law - the law that governs whose rules of decision control in any given situation of potential liability. To put it in geek terms, it is "meta-law". Law about law. Nothing more. There's no substantive law issues here.

  13. Earth to Cosmonaut Dmitry Sklyarov by Weaselmancer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Urgent! Do NOT GO into the module made by the United States.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  14. Independence by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1
    Form the Peoples' Republic of the ISS! The flag would be two horizontal stripes, black on top of blue, and a white star in the middle.

    Seriously though, if Earth's orbit gets any more populated, this is going to be an issue. If orbiting settlements ever get going, they might wish to break away and become self-governing.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:Independence by ed.mps · · Score: 1

      Gundam anyone?

      --
      !sig
    2. Re:Independence by joeytmann · · Score: 1, Funny

      we wish to cecede from the planet.....? Actually that doesn't sounds like to bad of an idea as messed up as it is.

      --
      Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
    3. Re:Independence by iocat · · Score: 1
      Hmm... that might be a good idea for a sci-fi book... or a thousand...

      Like the flag concept tough.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    4. Re:Independence by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      What would they trade for foodstuffs? And water. And oxygen. And any number of other things.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    5. Re:Independence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Orbitia: Artificial archipelago and independent state around Earth.
      Flag: elliptic ring of little stars on a black field around central blue-white circle.
      Motto: "Sine Gravitia, Libertas!"

    6. Re:Independence by dpilot · · Score: 1

      One could argue that the same question applies here on Earth, especially if biofuels expand their competition with food.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    7. Re:Independence by saider · · Score: 2, Funny

      What would they trade for foodstuffs? And water. And oxygen. And any number of other things.

      The nation's chief export will be zero gravity porn.

      But they will have to get more attractive citizens.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    8. Re:Independence by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      Yes. This is entirely logical, and I am ashamed that I did not think of it myself.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    9. Re:Independence by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      zero-gee manufacturing facilities, communications relaying, timeshares for rich vacationers... an orbiting facility could easily pay its own bills.

    10. Re:Independence by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      zero-gee manufacturing facilities,

      Currently not really economically feasible.

      communications relaying,

      Satellites are cheaper. And if you want to relay anything while in LEO, you're going to need lots of satellites.

      timeshares for rich vacationers

      That's probably the closest thing to being profitable.

    11. Re:Independence by SpinyManiac · · Score: 1

      zero-gee manufacturing facilities

      I can see it now. The next development in audiophile cables!

      --
      It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
  15. Simple by holywarrior21c · · Score: 1

    Build another module and have it served as jail-only-functional-module. and punish one according to UN laws(if there is one)

    1. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only to have the Russia and China vote against it in the Security Council, just because the U.S. funds most of the ISS.

  16. but but but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Astronauts don't break the law....
    Oh wait...

  17. Usual Suspects 2? by newgalactic · · Score: 1

    Keyser Söze is going to have a field day with this.

    1. Re:Usual Suspects 2? by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      :-)

      OK - the problem may be there but most actions that are considered a crime in one country are also crimes in other countries. For the few cases where there is a difference it may be a case for diplomatic dispute on earth. And even a successful psychological evaluation can let a person through that aren't really fit for certain conditions. Person chemistry is very important - especially in cramped quarters. Even if two persons goes through all tests with grand results they may be mismatching radically, and that is probably the most important issue to figure out. Most people breaks at some position, the question is only where and when.

      And really bad crimes are going to be self-solving anyways. "OK you just killed your fellows - we won't send up any food and air next time.".

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  18. Extremes by orzetto · · Score: 4, Funny

    What happens if you have a joint in the Dutch module and some jolly fellow pushes you over in the Singapore module? Do you get spaced?

    --
    Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    1. Re:Extremes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but female astronauts have to put on a burqa before going into the Saudi module.

  19. Million dollar pen? Use a pencil by Riddler+Sensei · · Score: 2, Funny

    I foresee the international trial of the century wherein American astronauts are accused of stealing pencils from the Russians after their own space aged pens die.

    1. Re:Million dollar pen? Use a pencil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pencils caused graphite particles to break off and could damage components of the station. Hence, ink was a much safer (albeit expensive) choice.

    2. Re:Million dollar pen? Use a pencil by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know, NASA only paid $4 a piece for those million dollar pens. They were developed entirely by private industry and were better than the pencils that both the Russians and NASA were using.

  20. United Nations? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is where some sort of general treaty needs to be defined for situations where sovereignty is ambiguous. The way I would see it:
        - any discovery performed in a situation in ambiguous territory should be defined as an international discovery
        - if a situation occurs that is considered beyond petty, then diplomatic channels should be used

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:United Nations? by ZombieWomble · · Score: 1

      I do think the "What about discoveries?" line is just a red herring - since when was the nationality of the discoverer/location of the discovery the sole factor in what nation "owns" a patent? Indeed, patents are not something which are solely restricted by nationality. The rights to any particular discovery will probably resolve to whatever institute or institutes planned and organized the experiment - and working in research in a university, I know how anal most such institutions are about intellectual property, so I'm sure they've got patent ownership sorted out neatly between themselves, regardless of how their governments dither.

  21. US Law is a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Allowing the US to write law for the ISS is a bad idea, especially when the idea of patentable research comes up. That would be far to open to manipulation by less than honest politicians in Washington. The law should be written on a multinational basis through collaboration. If the project is collaborative, then the rules should be too.

  22. Directive B10.81 by skydude_20 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Brannigans Law

    --
    Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
    1. Re:Directive B10.81 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hard and fast.

    2. Re:Directive B10.81 by Knight2K · · Score: 1

      Don't pretend to understand it, just enforce it.

      --
      ======
      In X-Windows the client serves YOU!
  23. pointless question... by AxemRed · · Score: 1

    I would think that the rule of law on the space station would be the same as the rule of law on a ship in the middle of the ocean. It's kind of like saying, if a bunch of sailors of different nationalities are out in the middle of the ocean on a UN ship, whose law applies? I don't know the answer, but I'm sure that there are policies in place. Just because the people are in space instead of in the ocean doesn't really change things that much in my mind.

    1. Re:pointless question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, it is different. as pointed out in the original story, the ISS is built by different countries. This is wholly different than a cruise ship or other vessel, where the entity was presumably built within and by a single country. the article postulates that the ownership of the various modules dictates an extension of that country's rights and laws.

    2. Re:pointless question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Canadian Criminal Code basically states that if any crime on the ISS involves a Canuck, Canada can prosecute the crime:

      Section 7:

      Space Station -- Canadian crew members

      (2.3) Despite anything in this Act or any other Act, a Canadian crew member who, during a space flight, commits an act or omission outside Canada that if committed in Canada would constitute an indictable offence is deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada, if that act or omission is committed
      (a) on, or in relation to, a flight element of the Space Station; or

      (b) on any means of transportation to or from the Space Station.

      Space Station -- crew members of Partner States

      (2.31) Despite anything in this Act or any other Act, a crew member of a Partner State who commits an act or omission outside Canada during a space flight on, or in relation to, a flight element of the Space Station or on any means of transportation to and from the Space Station that if committed in Canada would constitute an indictable offence is deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada, if that act or omission
      (a) threatens the life or security of a Canadian crew member; or

      (b) is committed on or in relation to, or damages, a flight element provided by Canada.

      This is the same section that governs crimes on aircraft, oil platforms, and some ships.

    3. Re:pointless question... by yams69 · · Score: 1

      Well, unless the Canadians figure out how to get the hypothetical criminal DOWN from the station themselves, I'd say the US or Russia can "render" him/her wherever the heck they want, since they're the only ones with the space-worthy paddywagons!

    4. Re:pointless question... by delong · · Score: 1

      f a bunch of sailors of different nationalities are out in the middle of the ocean on a UN ship, whose law applies?

      The law of the nation the ship is flagged under. The UN doesn't have ships, it only can charter the ship flagged under a State.

    5. Re:pointless question... by sethg · · Score: 1

      In general, does Canada claim jurisdiction over crimes committed against its citizens outside Canadian borders? Say Alice is a US citizen and Bob is Canadian. If Alice kills Bob in some country where Canada has no extradition treaty, and the local authorities decline to prosecute the case, and then Alice crosses the border into Canada, can she be arrested for murder? Can the Mounties go into that other country, snatch Alice, and drag her into Canada for prosecution? (Cf. US v. Noriega.)

      --
      send all spam to theotherwhitemeat@ropine.com
  24. How about by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the law of common decency?

    --
    We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
    1. Re:How about by ishpeck · · Score: 1

      How about the law of common decency?


      Hi! You must be new here. Welcome to Earth.
      --

      "If I were to ask you a hypothetical question, what would you like it to be about?"

    2. Re:How about by jc42 · · Score: 1

      the law of common decency?

      So are there any known countries that honor such a law? I've never heard of one.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    3. Re:How about by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Common decency is not as common as you think. That's why we have international law, because people from different cultures have *gasp* different laws and ideas of what is common courtesy.

  25. smuggling by mixenmaxen · · Score: 1

    So if an astronaut brings his dope from one module to another would that be considered smuggling?

  26. Already covered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought this was already covered. I once wondered about this, if a Canadian took his American friend out on a boat trip into the pacific, inter-national waters, and then killed him and dumped his body over board but got caught later where is jurisdiction? I was told, that the Canadian would be charged in his home country, whereas if the American was famous or such his country may ask for extradition.
    Usual IANAL disclaimer.

    1. Re:Already covered by eln · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is no law in international waters. You may remember that's where they held the famous Tyson-Secretariat fight (the "Slaughter in the Water").

    2. Re:Already covered by Ellis+D+Trippman · · Score: 1

      If that's true, then it paves the way for totally cool intergalactic monkey knife fights!

    3. Re:Already covered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasnt secretariat a race horse?

      Icee what you did there...

  27. four places at once by brunes69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are documented cases of people born on airplanes who were able to claim citizenship in four countries at once - their home country, the country where the plane took off from, the country where the plane landed, and the country whose airspace the person was in when they were born.

    1. Re:four places at once by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

      It happens at least once a year on scheduled flights, and no, all those nationalities do not count - the baby gets to claim the parents nationality and the destinations nationality.

    2. Re:four places at once by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 3, Informative

      ...and no, all those nationalities do not count - the baby gets to claim the parents nationality and the destinations nationality.

      Not entirely true. It depends on the citizenship laws of each country involved. For instance, simply being born in a country doesn't automatically give you rights to citizenship (I was born in Germany, but neither of my parents are German citizens, so it's not even an option for me). I'm sure there are a few combinations of the above example where someone would have legal rights to citizenship in all four countries.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    3. Re:four places at once by metlin · · Score: 3, Informative

      There are two types - Jus Soli and Jus sanguinis.

      Former grants citizenship as a function of soil/territory and the latter through blood lineage. So, the method of deeming a person's citizenship would be heavily contingent upon the method used for determining the same.

    4. Re:four places at once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if the parents were citizens of different countries, they could bump this up to five?

    5. Re:four places at once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What country's law applies on board of an airplane, say for example, crossing the Atlantic?

      The law of the country where the airplane is registered, of the destination, ...?

    6. Re:four places at once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are documented cases of people born on airplanes who were able to claim citizenship in four countries at once - their home country, the country where the plane took off from, the country where the plane landed, and the country whose airspace the person was in when they were born. Home country means country of the mother and country of the father.

      So I actually see five countries here. Whew!

      Anyway, I think the first step would be to make C++ errrr English the language used everywhere.
    7. Re:four places at once by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      What country's law applies on board of an airplane, say for example, crossing the Atlantic?

      The law of the country where the airplane is registered, of the destination, ...? AFAIK the law of the country the airplane is registered, just as with ships.

      However, what if I leave a ship for a swim in international waters, and someone from another ship (registered in another country) does the same, and then he steals something from me? Which law would apply there?
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    8. Re:four places at once by syousef · · Score: 1

      Which law would apply there?

      In most cases, the law of the jungle. You're in international waters. You're not an "important" person. Who's going to create a headache for themselves by claiming it as their juridiction.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    9. Re:four places at once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that childbirth can take a while - not just labour, but the act of squirting the little blighter out - if you are travelling over a lot of small countries, which one do you take to be the place of birth?

    10. Re:four places at once by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      However, what if I leave a ship for a swim in international waters, and someone from another ship (registered in another country) does the same, and then he steals something from me? Which law would apply there?


      Robbery on the high seas (more commonly known as "piracy") is, like torture, genocide, etc., the subject of a peremptory norm in international law, and the perpetrator is held to be the common enemy of all humanity, subject to the jurisdiction of any and every nation (and, indeed, a positive obligation of any and every nation to pursue the perpetrator.)
  28. Good question ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Whose Laws Apply On the ISS?

    You could say, whichever nation the ISS was above when the alleged crime was committed.

    In reality though, it will probably come down to the astro/cosmo/whatevernaut that smuggled aboard the biggest gun.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  29. Probably a lawyer by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    You have heard of ambulance chasing? Now we are spacecraft chasing. The scarey part is that they lawyers may be able to do what politicians could not; take apart NASA.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Probably a lawyer by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      And exactly what is wrong with NASA? A lot of good science comes out of it. Sure a lot of it isn't immediately obvious as to the benefit, but the country and the world as a whole is better off for having the agency around doing research.

      Climate research for example has greatly benefited from the actions of the agency.

    2. Re:Probably a lawyer by Applekid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Space truly is the final frontier [of litigation].

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    3. Re:Probably a lawyer by peragrin · · Score: 2, Funny

      because when the borg attack I shall use lawyers as my shield.

      Let the borg assimilate that.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    4. Re:Probably a lawyer by Kuxman · · Score: 0

      That is perhaps the scariest thing I have ever seen.

      --
      http://www.asti-usa.com
    5. Re:Probably a lawyer by ppc_digger · · Score: 1

      I wonder if assimilation is patentable...

      --
      Of all major operating systems, UNIX is the only one originally meant for gaming.
  30. right.... by superwiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Law? As in rules of civil society? How bout acknowledging the fact that there is no society on a space station and not giving in to lawyers who are trying to con people into thinking that their contribution is necessary in a situation where "law" is, in fact, the least efficient way to solve problems?

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  31. Nobody's by plasmacutter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    there are at most a dozen people up there at one time.

    one dozen people in a floating school bus don't need laws about drivers licenses, aircraft operation, housing codes, or logging regulations (maybe one day we'll have Treeees Innnnn Spaaace, but not today)

    it's not as if anyone can anonymously commit crimes up there, and if anyone gets really rowdy they can have a nice, cold, explosive time "out".

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:Nobody's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please. I've submitted at least 12 space station centered murder mystery plots to the various Law and Order franchises. Its not that hard to think of a way to kill on the space station and not have it be anonymous.

    2. Re:Nobody's by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      Oh please. I've submitted at least 12 space station centered murder mystery plots to the various Law and Order franchises. Its not that hard to think of a way to kill on the space station and not have it be anonymous.


      what did it involve exactly?
      *shot of group of 5 guys in the small and completely open floating cylinder*
      guy 1 - "you 3 look over there"
      guy 2 - "arrgh" *dies*
      guys 3-5 look back
      guy 1, hiding knife - "who did that?"
      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
  32. International waters by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why wouldn't they just follow protocols used by ships in international waters?

    --
    Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

    http://financialpetition.org/
    1. Re:International waters by Buran · · Score: 3, Insightful

      'Cause that's not what the treaty says must be done.

    2. Re:International waters by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think part of the problem (as listed in the summary) is that while a ship in international waters usually has a clearly defined nationality, the ISS has a bunch of parts originating from different countries, so the question is what is the nationality of the "ship". It sounds like the issue is not difficult when dealing with spacecraft of a single nationality (for example, the Space Shuttle.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    3. Re:International waters by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't they just follow protocols used by ships in international waters? Because, then we'd have to send pirates into space. And peglegs and hooks rip through spacesuits.

      I won't even go into the problems the ninjas will have...
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    4. Re:International waters by jeffkjo1 · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't they just follow protocols used by ships in international waters?

      Because, then we'd have to send pirates into space. And peglegs and hooks rip through spacesuits.
      I won't even go into the problems the ninjas will have...


      Ninjas create their own air... they don't need space suits.

    5. Re:International waters by Autonomous+Crowhard · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This situation happened before when airplanes were invented. There is already precedent.

    6. Re:International waters by juancnuno · · Score: 1

      Well, ships generally belong to one country, don't they? The sticking point here is that different ISS modules belong to different countries.

    7. Re:International waters by lbft · · Score: 1

      The questions are not unlike those that surround Antarctica. It's possible to get as many as four legal systems involved in a potential crime - the countries of the victim and the perpetrator, the country that claims that particular area of Antarctica and the country that owns the particular base. That's quite similar to the ISS, and the type of people we're talking about are kinda similar.

  33. heh by B3ryllium · · Score: 3, Funny

    In Space, no one can hear you scream Habeus Corpus. :)

    1. Re:heh by vertinox · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Space, no one can hear you scream Habeus Corpus. :)

      I can only imagine the expression on the face of the government agent who tries to water board someone for the first time.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  34. Interesting Questions by Thyamine · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Definitely opens the door for some interesting questions:

    • If an astronaut from Nation X makes a discovery in Nation Y's module/ISS component/lab, can Nation Y make a claim on the discovery?
    • Who's patent/legal laws apply to the discover made by the same astronaut? Does the astronaut get to choose? Do both have to apply?
    • Can a country ban an astronaut from it's soil, and thereby ban that astronaut from using it's module/equipment?
    • If two astronauts from two different countries have an altercation in a completely different nations module, who's legal authority is applicable?
    --
    I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
    1. Re:Interesting Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about this: does one astronaut need a Passport and Visa to go from one compartment to the next? And who processes the immigration forms for them and who stamps the passport? It all seems a little silly.

    2. Re:Interesting Questions by Tejin · · Score: 1

      If an astronaut does something to be banned from a participating nation's soil, I doubt they'll be approved to be sent to the ISS.

      --
      The seekers do no need truth, the seekers do find truth and the finding do be painful
    3. Re:Interesting Questions by reebmmm · · Score: 1

      I can take the patent law questions. Since patents are territorial and granted on applications submitted to that jurisdiction, it'll be the laws where an application are submitted. It doesn't really matter "where" you are when you do the inventing. If you invent something in Canada, you can still patent it in the US.

      The more interesting question has to do with those acts that might constitute "prior art" that are limited by territory, for example "in public use or on sale in [the United States]" for Sec. 102(b) purposes.

      As for Nation Y's claim to the invention, it's possible, I suppose, that there could be a law of a country that would require assignment of an invention to the government. I'll point out, though, that would probably be pretty unusual and difficult to enforce internationally. It would create some very interesting questions of title if a patent granted in a foreign jurisdiction were ever in dispute.

      The more likely result is that a scientist on the space station already has an obligation to assign their inventions to the government supporting their trip to the ISS (as do most employees of most companies).

    4. Re:Interesting Questions by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

      If two astronauts from two different countries have an altercation in a completely different nations module, who's legal authority is applicable?

      That one should be obvious - the owning nation's law. If an Aussie and a Brit get into a bar fight in an American bar, clearly American law prevails. Whatever exceptions to this case would clearly follow established precedent in terms of extradition and whatnot - this isn't the first time two non-citizens have broken the law on foreign soil (or deck plating, as it were).

    5. Re:Interesting Questions by dpilot · · Score: 1

      Then there's

      * Astronaut V is in Nation W's module, and shoots astronaut X, who is in Nation Y's module, but the bullet had to go through Nation Z's module to get there. I forgot the nation that manufactured the gun and bullets, but that shouldn't matter. (None of this should.)

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    6. Re:Interesting Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I really wish sensible judgment would preside in such cases:

      If an astronaut from Nation X makes a discovery in Nation Y's module/ISS component/lab, can Nation Y make a claim on the discovery?
      Both parties share the claim on the discovery.

      Who's patent/legal laws apply to the discover made by the same astronaut? Does the astronaut get to choose? Do both have to apply?
      Both.

      Can a country ban an astronaut from it's soil, and thereby ban that astronaut from using it's module/equipment?
      No. Soil should not be interpreted as a space module. If the country wants to ban the astronaut from the module, it needs to be explicit.

      If two astronauts from two different countries have an altercation in a completely different nations module, who's legal authority is applicable?
      The legal authority of the nation that the module belongs to.


      I fully realise my sense of "reasonable" will differ from others.
    7. Re:Interesting Questions by jc42 · · Score: 1

      * Astronaut V is in Nation W's module, and shoots astronaut X, who is in Nation Y's module, but the bullet had to go through Nation Z's module to get there.

      I've read of a similar case from some time back in the US. What happened was a shooting murder in which one of them (I've forgotten which) was in California, and the other was in Nevada. The lawyers discovered that in the shooter's state, the law stated that prosecution had to happen in the state where the death occurred, while in the victim's state, the prosecution had to be in the killer's state. So neither state had jurisdiction.

      Needless to say, both states quickly revised their laws so this couldn't happen again. But the US Constitution has a ban on retroactive laws, so the guy still couldn't be prosecuted.

      This has to have happened a few times in the past. Of course, the cops would likely look the other way if the victim's relatives or buddies "took the law into their own hands".

      I tried googling for it, got zillions of hits, but none of them seem at all relevant. I also checked snopes.com just in case, but found nothing. So I'm tempted to add "[citation needed"].

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    8. Re:Interesting Questions by XPisthenewNT · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the FBI be able to do something at the Federal level?

    9. Re:Interesting Questions by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      I've read of a similar case from some time back in the US. What happened was a shooting murder in which one of them (I've forgotten which) was in California, and the other was in Nevada. The lawyers discovered that in the shooter's state, the law stated that prosecution had to happen in the state where the death occurred, while in the victim's state, the prosecution had to be in the killer's state. So neither state had jurisdiction.

      Needless to say, both states quickly revised their laws so this couldn't happen again.

      So now the shooter's state's law says the prosecution has to happen in the shooter's state, while the victim's state's law now says the prosecution has to happen in the victim's state?
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    10. Re:Interesting Questions by Arguendo · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, there is actually a 1990 statute regarding the patent question: 35 USC section 105 (Inventions in outer space).

      Basically, if the invention is made, used, or sold on an outer space object under the jurisdiction or control of the U.S., it's considered to have been done within the U.S.

      I don't know of any specific statue regarding invention, but there's an analogous one on inventions made abroad (35 USC 104), and it says that if you call the U.S. home and you are in another country on behalf of the U.S., then you are considered to have invented it in the U.S. as well. All very rationale stuff.

    11. Re:Interesting Questions by jc42 · · Score: 1

      So now the shooter's state's law says the prosecution has to happen in the shooter's state, while the victim's state's law now says the prosecution has to happen in the victim's state?

      Yeah, probably. ;-)

      Which in turn leads to more billable hours for the lawyers, as they debate the application of the Constitution's rule against "double jeopardy" (which isn't a TV show, but a legal term for being prosecuted more than once for a single offense).

      I'd guess that they'd usually agree to prosecute in the victim's state. After all, California might not care if a Californian shoots a Nevadan, but Nevada probably would. And Californians might get upset if some Nevadans were hanging out at the border, gunning down Californians who came within range.

      I do sorta recall that this was how the laws were changed. But I might be remembering wrong.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    12. Re:Interesting Questions by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      If an astronaut from Nation X makes a discovery in Nation Y's module/ISS component/lab, can Nation Y make a claim on the discovery? Alexander Graham Bell (1847-1922) was born in Scotland, lived in Canada for a while, during which time he invented the telephone, then moved to the U.S. where he lived a good portion of his life.

      All three countries (four if you count Britain separately) claim him as their own.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  35. Aliens from outer space by ishmalius · · Score: 4, Funny

    We used to joke that, technically, cosmonauts who launched from Baikonur and landed at Canaveral were exactly that.

    1. Re:Aliens from outer space by Alomex · · Score: 1


      This is because Americans can tell the difference between "alien" and "foreigner".

      --Hello, I'm an alien from planet England, take me to your leader.

  36. Well, fortunately - by wsanders · · Score: 1

    - Putting on diapers and driving nonstop across the country to kill your romantic rival with a hammer will get you arrested pretty much anywhere.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Well, fortunately - by skoaldipper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Putting on diapers and driving nonstop across the country to kill your romantic rival with a hammer will get you arrested pretty much anywhere.
      Except in Soviet wing of Space Station, where lovesick stalker wearing cosmic ray infected diapers arrests you!

      Provided their hammer is bigger than yours, of course.
      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    2. Re:Well, fortunately - by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      In space, crazy diaper woman would be too drunk to swing the hammer.

    3. Re:Well, fortunately - by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Actually they'd probably attack you with a sickle since you have the hammer already.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  37. well its *called* by myowntrueself · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You will often see it called 'The NASA Space Station Project' in a great many news sources and thats how NASA refer to it...

    So I guess U.S. laws would apply since its obviously a NASA project...

    Oh wait, that would be in U.S. news sources... and in press releases from a U.S. space agency...

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    1. Re:well its *called* by tacodaemon · · Score: 1

      NASA calls it the International Space Station and so does everyone else I've seen. Compared to hundreds of thousands of hits for "International Space Station", I found a little over a hundred for "nasa space station project", including mostly lowercase versions that in context seem to mean "the project within NASA that contributes to the space station. Try doing some research before spouting off with your bigotry.

    2. Re:well its *called* by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Try doing some research before spouting off with your bigotry.

      May have changed; used to be the case on a great many space-news related websites including spaceref.com and www.space.com

      I even asked them about their use of the 'NASA space station project' term and they insisted thats what it was called in the NASA press releases.

      I stopped visiting their sites long ago. Checking them now, wow, its the ISS.

      Wonders will never cease.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    3. Re:well its *called* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure you aren't thinking of Skylab?

    4. Re:well its *called* by delong · · Score: 1

      Yeah, wow, it's just been called that for, like, a decade.

  38. One solution... by lpangelrob · · Score: 4, Funny

    1.) Provide each astronaut a handgun of personal choice
    2.) Place astronauts back-to-back in the center of the longest capsule on board
    3.) If velcro boots are provided, order each astronaut to take ten steps toward the edge of the capsule. If not, approximate 10 seconds of floating in opposite directions before turning and firing.
    4.) In the event the space station is still intact and both parties are still alive, review tape footage and declare the astronaut with the most matrix-like moves the winner.

    1. Re:One solution... by eck011219 · · Score: 1

      In the event of #3, if my understanding of Newton's Laws is accurate, the winning astronaut will still die of a massive injury to the back of the head as he careens backwards.

      Which would also serve to solve the problem of people who pick fights in tight quarters.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    2. Re:One solution... by MyrddinBach · · Score: 1

      You forgot..

      5. Profit!!

    3. Re:One solution... by PinkyDead · · Score: 1

      If you two don't stop fighting, I'm going to stop this space station and put you both out on the orbital path.

      I'm ringing flight control - I've got the phone in my hand. Look I'm dialing the number. My fingers are pushing the buttons. Don't make me come back there!

      Right, that's it I'm turning this thing around and we're going straight back to earth.

      --
      Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
    4. Re:One solution... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      In the event of #3, if my understanding of Newton's Laws is accurate, the winning astronaut will still die of a massive injury to the back of the head as he careens backwards.



      Your understanding might be accurate, but your numbers are not. While a bullet may be fast, it's also light (compared to, say, the mass of human body), and the astronaut will move in the opposite direction of the bullet at merely a few centimeters per second. (Conservation of impulse: m1 * v1 = m2 * v2)


      However, I'm not sure how the station will deal with the sudden pressure spike as the bullets are fired.

  39. Obligatory by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    In Soviet Russian module, the Party determines the laws.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The laws of physics as well, don't forget about that.

    2. Re:Obligatory by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      Nice idea, but I don't think they have that much booze on board.

  40. Getting away by xriz · · Score: 1

    Well, it's going to be really difficult to get away unnoticed after the crime...

    1. Re:Getting away by SuluSulu · · Score: 1

      So if an astronaut committed a crime in one countries module and then flees to another module, would he have to be extradited?

  41. Why the Law of Space of course... by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 3, Funny

    So far its only tenent is that "No one can hear you scream," but they're working on it.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  42. "Come in here and say that! by finlandia1869 · · Score: 1

    I can hear it now. Better yet, what if I stand in my module, throw a missile through a second module, and hit you in a third module? Then what?

  43. OT: Your sig by sconeu · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    It would be cooler if your domain was registered in Belgium, or if your domain was Calcium, instead.

    Then it would either be beryllium.be or calcium.ca :)

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:OT: Your sig by B3ryllium · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I looked into that, but sadly, Calcium wasn't toxic or metallic enough to use as my nickname (Bite my shiny metal ass!).

      And Belgium wanted nothing to do with me :)

    2. Re:OT: Your sig by sharkey · · Score: 1

      Unless you are writing a serious screenplay, you REALLY need to watch your language.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    3. Re:OT: Your sig by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean.

      If you're referring to my post, the parenthetical "insult" was a quote from the show Futurama, meant in jest. And the Belgians don't like it when outsiders register domains with them (understandably). They are somewhat more lax with their waffles and chocolate.

      If you're referring to my website's ramblings, you'll have to be a bit more specific as to what you mean.

    4. Re:OT: Your sig by sharkey · · Score: 1
      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:OT: Your sig by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. No offense intended.

      I shall now return to watching cricket on the telly, and eating my belgian waffles.

      (Note: I'm not actually doing either of those things)

  44. wel put the lawyer in the toilet compartment by PermanentMarker · · Score: 1

    wel put the lawyer in the toilet compartment the one who owns that owns the station in the end :)

    --
    I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid. You're afraid of us. You're afraid of change.
  45. Whose law applies by apexdawn · · Score: 1

    I think it should apply to whomever can cut off the other persons head and gain the quickening. :P

    -Reed

  46. Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The ISS has an illegal modded "region-free" DVD player, purchased by NASA and shipped up in 2001.

    Properly, the ISS should have a Region 8 player. Those are for aircraft, cruise ships, and "international venues". Airlines have to buy Region 8 players and discs for in-flight entertainment. Why isn't the MPAA pursuing this? It sets a bad example.

    1. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by tgd · · Score: 4, Funny

      The MPAA can pursue it, but they need to show up in person.

    2. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by theantipop · · Score: 1

      They just need to sue someone for, oh, say $1.65 trillion and start their own space program.

    3. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by dukieduke · · Score: 1

      They could, but that wouldn't be profitable. Their lawyers are better off suing anyone remotely involved with S.E.T.I. for trying to intercept digital radio signals. I'd also like to see what "out of court" settlement they try to make with Kang and Kodos when they land presenting the Voyager recordings.

    4. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why isn't the MPAA pursuing this?

      Yeah but the Motion Picture Association of America would have to claim jurisdiction, which is what is being contested. Mind asplode.

    5. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they don't know which country is braking the law!

    6. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by lhorn · · Score: 1

      Region-free DVD player illegal? Where exactly should I not go on holiday?

      --
      accept no limits but time
    7. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by tunah · · Score: 1

      The ISS has an illegal modded "region-free" DVD player Which countries would that be illegal in? (Serious question, are there any other than the US?)
      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
    8. Re:Illegal region-free DVD player aboard the ISS by donak · · Score: 1

      Without a space-suit? Quick, somebody "leak" the story to them!

      --
      Don't blame me, it's usually 2 in the morning when I post ...
  47. Sorry Chuck by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    We bought this defribulator in Cuba so, as a US citizen, it is illegal for you to use it.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  48. Simple solution by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 1

    The applicable law is the law of the country whose module generates the oxygen.

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
  49. Another First For Mankind! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the first rape happens in space, they should just make sure they do it in the Japanese compartment. Then the crime wont be reported and they'll likely blame the victim anyway.

    1. Re:Another First For Mankind! by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      When the first rape happens in space, they should just make sure they do it in the Japanese compartment.

      Sorry. We haven't yet contacted any alien species with sufficient tentacles for that to be a realistic scenario.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  50. Chuck Norris. by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

    Chuck Norris is the law. Everywhere.

  51. Legality by country by auroran · · Score: 1

    I can see a problem where something is done that's legal in one country (and that country's module) but not legal in another country. That would be a nightmare for the diplomats & lawmakers.

    1. Re:Legality by country by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      Jurisdiction and legality will work the same they do on Earth. The fact that it's in space doesn't make it special. It's all covered by two points:

      1) Your country of citizenship *always* has jurisdiction over you, even when you're in another country. Thus, if a person does something in Japan that is legal there but illegal in his country of citizenship, his country can prosecute him.

      2) When in a country other than your own, you are always subject to its jurisdiction. Thus, if someone is in Japan and does something that is legal in her country of citizenship but illegal in Japan, she can be prosecuted by the Japanese government.[1]

      [1] As long as she is not covered by a status of forces agreement or diplomatic immunity. In the first case, her own government has to prosecute (or not). All the Japanese government could do is declare her persona non grata. In the case of a status of forces agreement, the government of the service member in question has the option of either prosecuting the case or allowing her to be charged and prosecuted by the government of the host country (this is the only part with real potential for diplomatic difficulties). I recall at least one case during the time I lived in Japan in which the US government chose to allow three service members accused of kidnapping and raping a 12 year old girl to stand trial in a Japanese court. One plead guilty and the other two were convicted. I remember that there was considerable public outrage that the longest sentence handed down was 7 years. And it wasn't only the Japanese public that was upset. I recall reading a newspaper article in which a Marine colonel (speaking off the record, IIRC) complained he would have rather seen them court-martialed because they probably would have gotten 20 years in Leavenworth.

  52. Whose Laws apply on ISS by blhack · · Score: 1

    Whoever has the biggest vacuum tube on their ray gun.

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
  53. European law by Bromskloss · · Score: 2, Informative

    a piece of Europe

    As if Europe even was a single country with a common law. (Err, a law in common, that is.)

    Things seem to be going that way, unfortunately (EU, get out of Sweden now, please!), but we're not there yet.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    1. Re:European law by owlstead · · Score: 1

      EU = you. If you want out, just vote in a government that wants out. Or get involved and try to steer Europe in the right direction.

    2. Re:European law by Bromskloss · · Score: 1

      EU = you. If you want out, just vote in a government that wants out.

      You bet I do. I'm just too few.

      Or get involved and try to steer Europe in the right direction.

      Hehe, I have adopted a pessimistic attitude when it comes to politics (and many similar areas where one could possibly make a change): It's not worth it. If I worked with it all my life, I could probably change some small things, but it's too big a ship to turn. Even the random waves have a bigger influence than I. I am probably better off just trying to stay out of harm's way.

      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  54. Probably up to three or four. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flag the Ship is sailing under.
    Country of Departure.
    Country of Location if they were born in the territorial waters of a country.
    Parents Country of Origin/Birth depending on how that country treats citzens dependant children.

  55. Indeed by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

    I think Aunty Entity's "Two men enter, one man leaves" is sufficient...

    1. Re:Indeed by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      I think in Space, it would be more like "Two men leave, one man enters" ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  56. Just send Sean Connery to take care of it. by kenstcyr · · Score: 1

    He's done it before you know.

    --
    "That machine has got to be destroyed...."
  57. Aussies by N1ck0 · · Score: 1

    Don't worry the Aussies are working on a thunderdome module to go up in a few years.

    1. Re:Aussies by wizkid · · Score: 1

      GO AUSSIES!!

      --
      I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong :)
  58. If they commit a crime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Show them the airlock!

  59. Re:At least not in the US Module by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    In Space, no one can hear you scream Habeus Corpus. :)

    At least not in the US where I believe Habeus Corpus has been suspended in a few instances, or am I wrong? Its difficult to keep abreast of the US's slow descent into a police state...

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  60. Why does this remind me of this movie tagline? by RazzleDazzle · · Score: 1

    "In space no one can eat ice cream" from KKFOS

    or the more critically acclaimed
    "In space no one can hear you scream" from Alien

    --
    ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
  61. Re-read what I wrote by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    You will find that I am not knocking NASA. I am saying a bunch of lawyers will kill it by trying to play with issues that are not an issue at this time.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Re-read what I wrote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mistake, I wasn't sure whether you were knocking NASA or lawyers. Around here it can be either one.

  62. Astronauts tend to be military by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Astronauts tend to be military officers of their respective country. This makes things slightly more complicated to analyse (but possibly easier to resolve) because the ISS countries almost certainly have Status of Forces Agreements with each other.

    These agreementds basically say that military personel of the Sending country who commit crimes within the Host country will be held subject to the Sender's military law. So if a US austronaut screws up in a Russian module, he will be Court Martialed under US Military Law and not subject to Russian Law.

    IANAL (IAALS), this is not legal advise, if you go to jail because of it, it's not my fault.

  63. No Offense to the Dutch.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but there's no way in Hell we're using your laws. I don't wanna see what happens when a bunch of astronauts get way fucked up off a zero-g bong rip and munch out on food in tubes and freeze-dried ice cream. *shudders*

  64. Deathpenalty??? by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    What I wonder is if you commit a crime in a part of the space station where they have the death pelanty, will you get thrown out of an airlock?

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  65. We clearly also need... by elgrancerdo · · Score: 1

    faith in God and sexual releases. Yes, I said them on the same sentence. Clearly, it is time to provide restraints to vulgar and animal impulses, and what better way to do it than by an internal, self policing belief instead of books upon books of laws. We see from history that the most efficient way of succeding is to not only bring faith, but a way to curb the #1 need from Men, female sexual partners, either in the form of wives, girlfriends or shared sexual female partner. As dumb and as simple as it looks, it is needed because humans are controlling the space shuttles. Now, if you still want to send your stereotypical single MIT/Harvard/WestPoint geek to control your $$$ equipment without sending any kind of restraints, we should not be surprised of the success of our space colonization and research. Just like we had to pass an art class in order to get an engineering degree, we need more than engineering and science know how to sucess from this point forward, and the lessons learned from theology and physiology should come handy here.

    1. Re:We clearly also need... by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is a fallacy to think you need faith in God to have morals and restraint. A dangerous fallacy.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:We clearly also need... by elgrancerdo · · Score: 1

      OK. I'm not arguing your point. However, name the expedition or exploration along with its tangible successes that did not include the help or restraint of God as integral part of the expedition. Example (proving my point): Spanish colonization, along with Jesuit and Franciscan friars and using native women for sexual needs - 400 years of successful monopoly on Latin America, that left Spanish/European culture, language and religion on the conquered peoples up until today. Your turn.

    3. Re:We clearly also need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...400 years of successful monopoly on Latin America..."

      Erm, what? You seem to have a rather uncommon definition of what constitutes success. Many people don't think a genocide counts as "success".

  66. That would suck, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, son, the good news is you're not bound by traditional nationalities. The bad news is that it doesn't matter, because having been born and raises in space, your bone structure can't handle Earth's gravity and you can never go down and enjoy life like everyone else. Well, me and your mother are off to see the oceans and forests and breath the fresh air and feel the warm sunlight and cool breezes of Earth for the next 18 months! Have fun in your pod, there's plenty of dehydrated ice cream for you to eat, stay away from that one astronaut. Yeah, guy who's been offering you candy.

  67. Process by kaoshin · · Score: 1

    Such individuals should go on trial in every country in alphabetical order. If they die before completion then all remaining countries should leave the case open in the event the defendants are ressurected by futuristic technology or divine beings.

  68. Shooting someone in another compartment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if I'm in, say... the American module and I shoot someone in, oh... let's say the Japan module, where did the crime occur? In America where I pulled the trigger or in Japan where someone was shot?

    Bonus: Would this be considered an act of war?

  69. Great... by swotl · · Score: 1

    A bunch of diaper-wearers in a cramped space, all with diplomatic immunity...

    --
    -
    sig sig sputnik
  70. The same must be considered on the Internet by mvfuentes · · Score: 1

    The same must be considered on the Internet...
    Space and Internet has this point in common, has different rules from their original dimension
    Maybe astronauts must decide on space travels rules, and Internauts must decide Internet fate..
    Many behaviours are not equal so many rules must not be equal...
    Or can you kill someone inside a chat?
    So.. Vote for Kurt for Internet President must be a valid motion... Countries rules aren't needed...

  71. Fights on the ISS by Nick+Driver · · Score: 2, Informative

    Are the fights that serious on the ISS?

    With the possible exception of the temporary visitors, all the crews onboard the ISS, the Shuttles and Soyuz ships that service the ISS are all extremely disciplined professionals and have to behave as such at all times, especially since they are kept busy so much of the time, and their safety depends on their professionalism. These folks have been trained their whole careers to exercise great patience that it is second nature to them. I seriously doubt there are any "fights" more involved that something along the lines of "Awright, which one of you knuckleheads ate my last package of butterscotch pudding" or something like that. There have been some rather heated exchanges between the ISS crews and their mission control counterparts on the ground, and those are well documented, but so far there's been no widely publicized arguments between the ISS individual crew members themselves.

    1. Re:Fights on the ISS by CoolHnd30 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, all will probably be well their until the astronauts on the station start having relationships with each other... Then you'll end up with some wacky lady running across the space staion in a diaper with a can of mace to take out her rival....

    2. Re:Fights on the ISS by OmniBeing · · Score: 1

      Being as I'm too lazy to look up sources I expect to be flamed. But I do recall hearing an astronaut talk about an incident on MIR where one astronaut had clear homicidal inclinations to his counterpart and had to be talked out of it. I can't recall who. But it does happen.

      --
      - The Google Toolbar has a spell checker button AND it works, consider that before hitting submit next time k?
  72. Passport aboard? by Bananenrepublik · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why don't they simply carry their passports around, making sure that they get a stamp everytime they enter or leave a compartment? They should also set up extradition treaties in case the American murderer of the Russian cosmonaut hides in the Japanese compartment. Of course, if he manages to reach the American compartment, where he can't be extradited, the Russians may decide to decompress the station, which would force the murderer into the Russian escape pod. Sounds like a space soap opera, and more beneficial to humankind than all this research jabberjibber that noone understands.

  73. more interesting, who's ethics committee? by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For example, should stem cell research (legal in some countries, illegal in others) be permitted. Could it be done in, say, a european module, but not an american one. How about growing GM crops

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:more interesting, who's ethics committee? by fenodyree · · Score: 1

      When can we learn that stem cell research is not illegal in the US?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_controversy#U.S._Congressional_response

    2. Re:more interesting, who's ethics committee? by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      Stem cell research is a bad example since it's not illegal in the US.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  74. *AA in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So which countries allow file sharing again?

    Right. Okay, Bob, take that server and my laptop over to Module G.

  75. Mine by geekoid · · Score: 1

    You got a problem in the ISS, you come to me. I'll straighten it out.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  76. Age of consent in space? by countSudoku() · · Score: 1

    What would *that* be then? These are things we need to know for scientific progress!

    --
    This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
  77. Ape law! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    Since primates were in space before humans, space is obviously under Ape Law.

    1. Re:Ape law! by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Since primates were in space before humans, space is obviously under Ape Law.

      Hmmm ... Humans are primates, in particular we're a species in the "ape" subfamily. It follows that any human law is an "ape law".

      Am I missing something here?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    2. Re:Ape law! by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dude, dogs were first. Those astronauts better be prepared to sniff some ass...

    3. Re:Ape law! by Vexor · · Score: 1

      Let the poo flinging begin!!!

      --
      ~Vexed and loving it!
  78. Passport? by silgaun · · Score: 0

    So if each module belongs to it's respective country, is a passport needed to go between rooms? What if someone can't go to Japan for what ever reason. Are they banned from entering a room owned by Japan?

    1. Re:Passport? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if each module belongs to it's respective country, is a passport needed to go between rooms?

      Yes, retard, a passport would be required. What a dumbass. Der de der de der der.

  79. Why ? by this+great+guy · · Score: 1

    Because!

  80. setup border checkpoints from room to room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with a military to protect them. the funny thing is is how ridiculous it sounds. but then there are thoughs that would create some bad guys and then tell you that they will protect you from them, thats why you need them. Gee? why wouldn't the world just let the US have jurisdiction over it?

  81. Whoosh by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Literally. Right over.

  82. Skull and Cross Bones by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    Archangel's Rules to live by ....

    #538) Always sail the seas under the flag of a pirate, especially if you're pregnant.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  83. I've got one word for you. by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Whoosh. Right over. By several hundred miles.

  84. Defend Our Borders!!! by Bastardchyld · · Score: 2, Funny

    I propose building a wall around our ISS modules. I am tired of illegal space men crossing our borders to steal our resources. Although on the upside at least we do not give them drivers licenses.

    --
    $diff terrorists hippies
    $
    $rm -rf *terrorists *hippies
  85. Probably same thing applies as on earth. by AftanGustur · · Score: 1


    Whoever has the most money and political influence is "right".

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  86. Just like Vegas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happened in the ISS stays in the ISS...

  87. Water by eosp · · Score: 1

    If Alice kills Bob at sea (in international waters), her home country's law would apply.

  88. Don't count on it! by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

    Since the nappy wearing stalkernaut incident, I've not been so sure.

    I think, if they ever really do have such a fight on the ISS, they should be made to take it outside.

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  89. Goddam by okmijnuhb · · Score: 1

    If humanity will have trouble reconciling disputes in outer space, interplanetary colonization looks pretty bleak.
    Then again with humans on the path to rendering an entire planet uninhabitable, a space capsule wouldn't stand a chance.

  90. Sounds like Antarctica. by CCFreak2K · · Score: 1

    "If somebody performs an activity which may be considered criminal, it is in the first instance his own country which is able to exercise jurisdiction," Dr. von der Dunk added.
    Sounds like Antarctica, really.
    --
    "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
  91. "a piece of Europe"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There's no such thing as "European law", as such, in this context.

    Which specific country is it that has a little piece floating in space?

    My guess is France, because the French are pushy about issues of nationality and sovereignty, and the rockets will have been launched from their bases.

  92. Yeah... Lawyers, that's what we need by jzuska · · Score: 1

    We need law in space that's a great first step.
    How about we cross that bridge when we get to it. Could you imagine how many frivolous lawsuits there will be once something like this is decided.

    "The coffee on the ISS was too hot, that's a good 60 million"
    "The toilet sucked my pee-pee too hard and left me with welts, should be 100 million"
    "Ouch I stubbed my toe on the Iss, 20 million"

    Fuck that shit.

  93. Embassies by Gnavpot · · Score: 1

    Does each nation have embassies in the other nations' parts of the station?

  94. vander dunk by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    So if you run around the station yelling "uh huh huh his name is Vader Dunk" do the Germans get to shoot you?

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  95. whatever laws Bush says are valid by wardk · · Score: 1

    easy one to answer, the decider decides

  96. Europe? by spyfrog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "It was agreed that each state registers its own separate elements, which means that you now have a piece of the US annexed to a piece of Europe annexed to a piece of Japan in outer space, legally speaking".

    Ok, anybody besides me that see an obvious question regarding this: which European states law apply in ESA's sections? There is no "Europe" when it comes to laws - each country have their own.
    So which is it? English? French? German? Dutch? Italian? Spanish? Or another European law?

  97. Getting ready for space tourism are we? by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...or has the professionalism of astronauts diminished from what it was years ago?

    Oh wait..... Woman astronaut stalks.... http://sfbayguardian.com/entry.php?catid=77&entry_id=2903

    Yeah I guess it has...

    On another front, if you are born in space in teh space of combined space station parts from numerious countries, which country do you have citizenship in?

  98. Which? by Dausha · · Score: 1

    Which country owns the airlock to the shuttle? Let's say it is the U.S. You can't enter or exit except through there. So, they have control. Otherwise, I commit murder in the Russian section and flee to the U.S. section. There's no court up there that exercises jurisdiction, so no extradition... The perfect crime. Oh, wait. Taxation is the perfect crime.

    --
    What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
  99. no "European" jurisdiction by delong · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's even worse than that. The ESA sections really muddy up the waters. The ESA and the EU have no legal personality in international law. Which member nation of the ESA would have legal responsibility? All, or none? Who the hell knows.

  100. For children born on the moon its easy by Gresyth · · Score: 0

    they would be Moonies.

    --
    Tech Support: "No, sir...clicking on 'Remember Password' will NOT help you remember your password."
  101. In all seriousness by Daltin · · Score: 0

    I seem to remember somewhere that the laws of a boat in international waters depend on the flag being raised, the flag it's sailing under. Now, tell if I'm wrong, but I would bet this holds something in space... So whose flag "flies" (or is painted) on the ISS? A lot of flags, to my knowledge. Well, this comment went no one. Let's put it this way: Bad things are bad.

  102. only laws common in all countries by Cyko_01 · · Score: 1

    Only laws common among all countries should apply. This should rule out murder, adultery, theft, and all the other moral-based laws. If problems arise then they can add to or change them as needed and they will apply in space only.

    OR...
    they could also use the 10 commandments. Although I doubt everyone will be able to agree on that, it would be a good starting point.

  103. What about birth indeed! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1
    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  104. No laws in outer space... yet by jonfr · · Score: 1

    There are no laws in outer space, or on the Moon and Mars for that matter. The X country can declare that there own space ship has there laws and rules. Then it is fine for them. But if I did go to the Moon and did declare this piece of moon land my own country nobody would be able to stop it, so to speak (other nation can always invade). However there is a U.N treaty that declares that no nation can declare that they own part of the Moon or something along those lines.

    But I don't know how it goes if where dealing with space that is x,y,z big or some other planet that my not fall under the U.N treaty, like a asteroid.

  105. i dont mean to nitpick a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but i believe only the guilty survive

  106. The Future of Space Travel. by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

    In the end space travel was killed by the many laws human lawyers drafted to make themselves look important. Thus leaving the earth vulnerable to extermination by the Shiny Red Robots of Vortis.

    While other species across the universe were able to protect themselves from the Shiny Red Robots of Vortis by having space colonies to re-populate their homeworlds in case the Robots decided to pay them a visit, the Humans had none so they died off quite easily.

    The ironic part is that the Shiny Red Robots of Vortis had no qualms about wiping the life off homeworlds because they knew they would be re-populated from space colonies and in a couple thousand years they would provide them with a fresh batch of brains to suck out of intelligent beings living there.

    The Shiny Red Robots of Vortis were sad when they visited earth a thousand years later to find no intelligent life, maybe, they thought, there had never been any.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  107. This will give lawyers jobs like net neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What? I have 5 billion dollars and I can't do whatever I want on my satellite hotel?

  108. Answer by Wobble-U · · Score: 1

    Nobody's!!! Har te har har har!

  109. Harmony brings a place for your space crimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This means that the Italian-built module Harmony will be ruled by Italian justice, which is reputed to be extremely inefficient in bringing criminals to jail.

    If you want to commit space crimes, that's the place to be!

  110. What's 10000 lawyers in low earth orbit ? by Ihlosi · · Score: 2, Funny

    A good start.

  111. International law by master_p · · Score: 1

    Since the artificial borders between countries are starting to fade, we need an international law which covers all these problems.

    It's no coincidence that sci-fi presents the future Earth as one big country. Our differences are petit and artificial, and the sooner we realize that, the better.

  112. Actually, there is *extensive* common EU law... by blorg · · Score: 1

    ...which actually takes precedence over member states' national law in cases of conflict. It also makes up over 50% of codified law in most, possibly all member states. Whether you like it or not is another matter; that is the way it is.

  113. Space Swirly by UberHoser · · Score: 1

    Nuff said.

    --
    Guns are for wimps... Use a crossbow.. this way you can pin them to their chair when you go postal.
  114. The money angle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's important to note that Haliburton has already negotiated the rights to the duty-free concession on the ISS.