Congress Can't Make Asteroid Mining Legal (But It's Trying, Anyway)

Jason Koebler writes: Earlier this week, the House Science Committee examined the American Space Technology for Exploring Resource Opportunities in Deep Space (ASTEROIDS) Act, a bill that would ensure that "any resources obtained in outer space from an asteroid are the property of the entity that obtained such resources."

The problem is, that idea doesn't really mesh at all with the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, a document that suggests space is a shared resource: "Unlike some other global commons, no agreement has been reached at to whether title to extracted space resources passes to the extracting entity," Joanne Gabrynowicz, a space law expert at the University of Mississippi said (PDF). "There is no legal clarity regarding the ownership status of the extracted resources. It is foreseeable that the entity's actions will be challenged at law and in politics."

Comments

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the leprechaun's pot of gold? Can we take that too?? Has as much chance of becoming real!!!

Re:LOL

[sillybilly]

Yeah, no kidding. They are worried the Chinese are gonna colonize space, and we will be left behind, so they come up with this property bullshit. Dude, property is about respecting others rights. If you go to outer space, and you take a piece of rock from an asteroid, and build a space station from it. people down here in the USA are gonna cry foul, it's common property, you can't take it, it's ours too, but the fact is unless they can send the police over to claim it was theft, or the military, it's all just bullshit. That's where the rubber meets the road. Space war. Over a piece of rock. Who owns is. History of human civilization, who gets what, who owns what, who controls what, west side, west side, nigga die over a block you don't even own, you paying rent, mofo. Maybe we should convince the Chinese to pay us rent for using the asteroid or Moon materials for their space stations, in case they succeed making it there before us.

Re:LOL

[Redbehrend]

My problem isn't the resources, it's how they will cut corners to be first and somehow kill us all in the processes.
They just planned to kill their local fishery and destroy a whole ecosystem just so they can build an artificial island in contested waters for an airport.
They are idiots IMO they will probably find the biggest asteroid and somehow change it's direction towards earth while trying to grab the resources.

Re:LOL

[TWX]

Sounds like what needs to happen is a recognition that when an entity mines in space, it can claim that its value-add in extracting those resources gives a claim to those extracted resources and only those extracted resources, with the possible exception of an active, ongoing extraction operation having the right to exclusive use of the mine and only the mine while the operation is active. Once the operation is inactive then it's fair-game for others to start using it too.

I don't see a lot of threat in the Chinese or any other power colonizing space and managing to keep hold of their colonies. Space exploration is in the same place as "New World" exploration was at the first voyage of Columbus, in the sense that as as species we don't really have the developed means to take territory and hold it, and I expect that it'll go through a revolutionary-era as well, when those that have actually done the colonizing or the progeny thereof decides that they don't really need the mother-country anymore. That period might be harder if the colonies don't find ways to be self-sufficient, but given the sheer cost in sending supplies, any colony would have to be self-sufficient to be financially practical. Like the United States was in the 1770s, space colonies will be too far away from the motherland to be easily held if those colonies want to break away, as it'll be too expensive garrison them and simply won't be worth the effort.

Re:LOL

[theshowmecanuck]

"any resources obtained in outer space from an asteroid are the property of the entity that obtained such resources."

Sounds to me like it says that whoever gets the iron, gold, iridium, space fairy dust, whatever from an asteroid owns it. I don't see how that is different from what happens on earth (aside from the space fairy dust). Whoever digs the hole generally owns the minerals extracted. What I didn't see is how they determine who owns the mine or has rights to mine a particular rock. Being a pretty extreme environment, at first it may just boil down to possession is nine tenths of the law. But I personally don't see any issues with this. Whoever gets the stuff out should own it. Just as long as they don't fuck up returning material to earth and accidentally drop a football field size chunk of iron or nickel (or whatever) on a city at orbital velocities. Maybe better to make the finished goods on the moon if they need gravity, or in lunar orbit first. Keep the big dangerous shit away from the planet.

Re:LOL

[NicBenjamin]

Why would space colonies want to break away?

Presumably any earth-entity capable of colonizing the far reaches of the Solar system would have to be a fairly important country. It would also offer any thriving colony the local equivalent of a path to statehood. Why secede when you can get two Senate seats?

A lot of SciFi is based on the assumption that future leaders have not learned the lesson of the past. Even the Brits have learned that at some point you off the colony a choice: go independent without a war, or get a vote in Parliament.

Re:LOL

[Tuidjy]

I don't see how that is different from what happens on earth (aside from the space fairy dust). Whoever digs the hole generally owns the minerals extracted.

Where are you from? Because I have lived in a dozen countries, on three continents, and the minerals have either belonged to the one being able to use violence to overwhelm anyone else who wants them, or to the one holding a contract an the entity able to use violence to overwhelm anyone else. (Also know as the State. The contract often has a name like deed, title, etc...)

There is no property, and I doubt there has ever been property, without the means to protect it. In the past, and in some shitty places in the present, that means the owner being able to protect it himself. But we, as a society, have decided that it is more efficient (for those who matter) to actually have a mechanism that allows property to be protected by a larger group than the owner.

I doubt space will be any different. When it is in the interest of those who matter, they will get together and come up with a mechanism that will allow people who matter to exploit space resources. By definition, if a group can keep other groups out, that's the only group that matters.

Now, everyone has his own opinion on who matters... I will not bother arguing about that.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean like how NASA risked the entire planet to launch Cassini?

Re:LOL

[theshowmecanuck]

As to uncivilized retards making it into space, any place that still behaves the way you describe doesn't exhibit much intelligence and has very little likelihood of ever making it into space. And face it, any corporation that will make it to space has more resources and brain power than most uncivilized countries. And to to be generous, the places that can make it into space are the places that sell the tin pot dictatorships you speak of their fourth rate war gear. So if there was any concern the industry that does make it there will have access to far better defence technology than your banana republics. For the foreseeable future there is pretty much no chance that space flight will be so common or easy that we see the kinds of space pirates written about is science fiction. So all told, your point is moot.

Since you started a pissing contest: Sure. I have lived long term in two countries, worked in 3 on two continents, and have travelled to and through at least 14 countries on 3 continents (worked in 4 provinces and 5 states... only two of which count in months, been to six of the ten provinces in Canada, and 41 of the 50 US states). And I pay attention, from multiple sources, to what goes on in the world. And I suspect the reason you can claim to have worked in 14 countries is because mostly the countries are fairly tiny and close together, which means not that big a change in terms of the general culture. Anyone who moves around North America can make the same claim. The difference is it is civilized here, unlike it seems, anywhere you've been (compared to Africa, what went on in Ferguson MO, is a blip).

Re:LOL

[ColdWetDog]

Oh look! A radionuclide! Run Away! Run Away!

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

If you go to outer space, and you take a piece of rock from an asteroid, and build a space station from it. people down here in the USA are gonna cry foul, it's common property, you can't take it, it's ours too, but the fact is unless they can send the police over to claim it was theft, or the military, it's all just bullshit. That's where the rubber meets the road. Space war.

They can't send the police over to space, but they should as hell can send troops to the country that is still on Earth. Not space war, just the usual war.

It is no different from the US Govt forcing Microsoft to give them data from across the Atlantic, they can't send police over, but they sure can send police to Microsoft offices on this side of the pond.

Will the US go to war with China over a space rock? Probably not. But any other country that is going to space? Tough call.

Re:LOL

[Beck_Neard]

> when those that have actually done the colonizing or the progeny thereof decides that they don't really need the mother-country anymore.

I'd be alright with that, but the problem is that space isn't like the surface of the Earth where you have neatly demarcated areas that you can lay claim to and you have to actually travel to in order to use. You could have companies pushing around asteroids and bumping them into Earth orbit, extracting resources, without sending even a single person over to the actual asteroid (all done with a bunch of robotic probes). You will inevitably get two companies (or countries) fighting over who gets the right to push which asteroid around. Neither of them are even near the asteroid, and no colony will be set up on the asteroid since it's probably far too small to support an independent human population by itself.

I guess a good analogy would be the Pacific islands and not the 13 colonies. The pacific islands changed hands so many times and many still have debatable levels of 'belonging' to another country. Now imagine if the pacific islands were free to roam around...

Re:LOL

[flyneye]

Yeah, space is a limited commodity. Like Leprechaun Gold @ a Colorado dispensary.
Who in their right mind was part of this Treaty to begin with? No one in their right mind.
If they weren't in their right mind, their contract is as good as toilet paper.
We need more employment, resources and fewer people on the planet.
If you tie up the mining companies resources in space, it means they're not as active here.
I'm not even a lawyer, closer to a super-villain, and even I can see the right thing to do here is quit damn worrying about what the neighbors think and go fuckin' stake a claim.

Re:LOL

[flyneye]

Let's crowd-source shooting the Chinese into space! Let's put them there first! Show a little brotherhood.
There's enough space to go around. I can see quibbling about the moon on the light side, but REALLY!
Go forth and mine. Set up diverse industrial asteroids. Be neighborly. Get along with each other or you don't get to come back to Earth.
Let's send the most quarrelsome of everyone into space. Give 'em a job and something to bitch about. Keep them busy and out of our hair.
Set up an asteroid for the U.N. and all the world leaders, call it Botany Bay and accidentally, well, you know...
Now quit thinking so selfishly about the vastness of everything being property, let alone shared. Just share it, it's an endless resource.

Re:LOL

[Teancum]

The reason you can make a claim in North America and have it stick is due to the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Army. They are the guys that make it possible to make a mining claim and not have to worry about having some 2-bit thug come along and take your mine from you. That is what makes civilization possible. As much as Canada wants to assert their independence, they are dependent upon the U.S. military to make sure Russia doesn't go and sack the northern part of their country (or the whole country for that matter). Ditto for Mexico (in spite of the gangs in northern Mexico.... proving my point and the GP poster above).

The problem with the assumptions about those hoping for peace and tranquility in space is that you don't have sovereignty claims, thus no military of any kind except for pirates and thugs who don't give a damn about treaties or the United Nations. This also includes opportunistic nations that may want to take any space-based assets. That is not an environment you want to be investing billions or perhaps even trillions of dollars worth of money to develop space-based mineral assets.

Yes, space is big, far bigger than you can imagine. None the less, once you start sinking resources into developing a location in space, it becomes a target for aggression. That becomes a fixed point that can be occupied and stolen. Thugs will beat you up simply to steal ten bucks out of your wallet.... what will they do for assets worth billions? That is why you need to have available some friends who are far bigger and badder than any potential thug to allow civilized behavior to flourish.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

And since nothing bad happened, what exactly is your point?

Re:LOL

[AJWM]

Who in their right mind was part of this Treaty to begin with? No one in their right mind.

Bear in mind that if the treaty dates to 1967, it was being worked on in 1966, possibly earlier. At that time, the US was seriously worried that it might lose the space race to the Soviet Union (who were still racking up "firsts" faster than the US), so there was probably an aspect of bet-hedging to it. (1967 was also the "summer of love", so, hippies, and height of the Viet Nam war, so, distraction. So yeah, not in their right minds.)

When the Moon Treaty (also known as the treaty on the useful pieces of outer space) reared its ugly head some years later, plenty of people loudly and vigilantly campaigned to avoid it being ratified. (The successful effort was largely led by the L5 Society -- which was quietly thanked some years after that by several foreign (*cough USSR cough*) nationals because they didn't want it either.)

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

you talk like an idiot. you make idiotic points. you must be an idiot, dude. only a very select few idiots in USA would cry foul. you seem to have missed that it is, in fact, US Congress that is trying to give property rights to the asteroids to whatever ENTITY. here in the USA, we believe 100% in property rights. back in 1967, all of the nations that signed the treaty were thinking about the moon and possibly planets. they didn't want any one particular country 'owning' the moon or mars, etc. which makes perfect sense. why did they word it so vaguely so that it encompassed everything in space? because it was completely new territory. they started broad, knowing they could always go back to the table and define particulars. this is the way of all things. you start with broad strokes, then add details.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

"My problem isn't the resources, it's how they will cut corners to be first and somehow kill us all in the processes. "

Not all that hard. All it takes is one rock of decent size moving towards earth, and everyone dies.

Re:LOL

[Concerned Onlooker]

"Yes, space is big, far bigger than you can imagine. "

You might even say "vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big."

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

... gives a claim to those extracted resources and only those extracted resources ...

That works for moving (and usually living) resources. It's not so applicable to land-locked resources like oil, water and metal ores. Half of the battles on this planet have been over land; with ownership and exclusivity being a necessary attribute to support capitalism and technological progress. If land can't be owned, then one has a "Monty" C Burns scenario: Simply build a derrick/colliery beside the first mining installation and tunnel across to the resources.

... space colonies will be too far away from the motherland to be easily held if those colonies want to break away.

Since, as you admit, they won't be self-sufficient, the best a space colony can do is change nationality: Like a sea ship can at the moment. Or a colony may be forced to change political allegiance, like Crimea was.

Re:LOL

[mysidia]

But I personally don't see any issues with this. Whoever gets the stuff out should own it.

As long as that stuff doesn't come from my tracts of land on the Moon, Mars, etc, claimed through the Lunar embassy.

And if they do extract resource from unauthorized mines on my land, then I would be entitled to the value of 100% of the raw resources extracted.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Enough with the chest thumping. I don't give a fuck. And no, there won't be space pirates for a long time to come. Space is vast, and we barely know how to steer a log in that river never mind a raft. We've got a couple hundred years before we have to worry about space pirates. Despite what you may think, Star Trek and Firefly aren't real.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

The moderator was a retard, that is not a troll.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Christ, its a 200 meter extension on an existing island, its not going to kill the ecosystem of lake ontario. I don't see anyone protesting the continued expansion of the leslie street spit just 2km away which has become a popular nature reserve, and productive ecosystem.

Re:LOL

[Tuidjy]

I cannot decide whether you lack comprehension of your own native language, or whether you are deliberately obtuse. Or maybe you believe that North America's civilization, which I do not dispute, means that your property is magically safe because the people around you are a different breed from the ones populating the rest of the world.

Let me recap.

You said: I don't see how that is different from what happens on earth (aside from the space fairy dust). Whoever digs the hole generally owns the minerals extracted.

This is completely incorrect everywhere I have been, and that certainly includes the United States, where I currently work. (BTW, the countries you call 'tiny' include six of the eight largest economies in the world)

In general, oil, gas and minerals in the US belong not to whoever digs the hole, but to whoever owns the land directly above them. That is different from most other countries in the world, where they belong to the State, period. Even in the US, the resource rights can be separated from surface ownership by an explicit deed, and there are provisions according to which land owners can be forced to sell their rights, even if they are already exploiting the resources, or even if the extraction of the resources will detrimentally affect their use of their property.

Familiarize yourself with the laws of your own country! They vary from state to state, but they have a few things in common. The most important thing, of which you are clearly unaware, is that you own fuck all. The deeds, titles, etc. which allow you to use land or resources are granted by the State, and the State can unilaterally break the contract if it deems it necessary. People living on lands needed for malls, people farming above oil deposits, people raising livestock on 'frackable' terrain... those have all learned exactly how much their deeds and titles are worth. Because the US is civilized, they will be reimbursed by their losses... exactly as much as those who matter think that they should be paid.

I explicitly said: the one holding a contract with the entity able to use violence to overwhelm anyone else. Who the hell do you think I was referring to? Who do you think has its monopoly on using violence enshrined in law?

Space will be no different. Resources will belong to whoever has come to an agreement with the entity that can enforce its will (project force, has monopoly on violence, blah blah blah) Right now, there is no entity that can do this in space, which means that if you could extract the resources, you could pretend you own them as long as you stay away from Earth. Once you enter the sphere of influence of various States, things will be different.

Re:LOL

[Teancum]

Everybody thought the era of pirates was over.... until they started to show up again in the 21st Century here on the Earth. If the opportunity presents itself, there will always be people who will take advantage of a power vacuum and try to take that which is undefended.

No, it won't be like Star Trek or Firefly..... those are too slick and clean cut. It will be far more ugly and different still. This isn't chest thumping, it is facing reality instead of burying your head in the sand and thinking none of this is going to happen. I'll also say that a couple hundred years is nothing in terms of human history too. If you don't make longer-term plans, your civilization is simply doomed to extinction.

Re:LOL

[Teancum]

Yes, Douglas Adams had a really good way to describe such things. I miss the guy.

Re:LOL

[JockTroll]

Why would space colonies want to break away?

Two words: Mobile Suits.

And two more: SIEG ZEON!

Re:LOL

[tragedy]

And since nothing bad happened, what exactly is your point?

I think that was exactly the point.

It's sort of like how, when North Korea attempted a satellite launch not too long ago, the news was full of stories about how incredibly irresponsible it was since a satellite breaking up in orbit could turn into a chain reaction that would scour all orbits of all satellites. These stories were coming, of course, from the propaganda machines of countries which have, on more than one occasion, intentionally blown up satellites in orbit to demonstrate military power.

Re:LOL

[ihtoit]

bingo. This is what the Outer Space Treaty is intended to prevent, there is no legtimacy in staking claims in space (that bit of the Moon you think you "own"? Well, you simply don't). There is, however, NOTHING in it preventing private entities or even State parties from exploiting resources from space, with the caveat in the case of State parties that anything they extract is for the good of ALL. It makes NO provision or restriction on private exploitation of space. If you mine it, it's yours, however you CANNOT prevent someone else from mining in the same place for the same thing, until it comes out of the regolith it's anybody's. The maxim holds here: if it is not specifically illegal then it is fundamentally legal. Claim staking: illegal. Exploitation: legal.

*Let me try and clarify: I can plant a quartz mine on the Moon, but I can't stick a forty foot perimeter fence around it and I can't prevent my competitor building a quartz mine five feet away.

Re:LOL

[DanielRavenNest]

*Let me try and clarify: I can plant a quartz mine on the Moon, but I can't stick a forty foot perimeter fence around it and I can't prevent my competitor building a quartz mine five feet away.

Actually, spacefaring nations have already laid out operational safety rules. For example, the ISS has a 1 km "keep out zone" around it. For the Moon, you can't place your landing pad so close to my mine that it kicks up rocks and damages my equipment, and conversely outgassing from my mine processing can't contaminate your solar arrays. Once people actually set up operations on the Moon or some asteroid, there will be reasonable *and agreed to* safety boundaries and access roads, which will, over time, become property lines and public roads. For the latter to happen, you will need to reach a point where people are buying, selling, and subdividing land, and sharing costs for transport improvements.

Assuming the 1 km keep-out zone is adopted for asteroid mining, then any asteroid smaller than 1 km will be the province of one mining operation, unless they set up as a multinational or joint corporate project (which is actually pretty likely).

Re:LOL

[ihtoit]

well, yeah, there's the obvious safety factors, but the thing is you can't use that as a band-aid for claiming mineral rights - the only minerals you can claim in space are the ones you dig up yourself and put in your cargo hold. Once you take off (and I would assume there'd be some rule for not leaving anything behind, like broken equipment or bags of shit or anything else to mark or otherwise prevent landing by anyone else), that patch is anybody's.

Re:LOL

[mysidia]

I think once they have found minerals, they will set up a permanent operation there. When they take off; it will be to bring one shipment back to where they could market it, however: people and assets would remain in the area, and it would be controlled, and it would likely be continuing to mine until the next wave of freight carriers come by to pick up the next shipment.

Re:LOL

[sillybilly]

And very empty, to where any piece of rock in a low gravity environment, such as the Moon or and asterorid (not so much Jupiter or even Earth that are too deep a gravity wells) is worth blood.

Re:LOL

[sillybilly]

I signed a land purchase contract that explicitly transferred mineral rights, and I did not really care, I mean I do, but what I really needed was a tranquil living space. At the county they hold the documents they don't make public the records, and you have to walk into their office, through a metal detector, and any hard copy or printed proof you want to take away they make you pay for it. It's not possible to research the history of a piece of land without going bankrupt over the fees if the history is littered through and through with documents, going back all the way to the Native Americans. In a lot of countries whoever owns title owns the land, and if they own it by mistake, and someone else should have it, that someone else can get monetary compensation from the government, but they do not reverse title. In the US you buy what's called "Title Insurance" which is a major ripoff, but at least it's a one time fee only for a one time service, that is, someone at the private title insurance agency digs through the land records, and if they don't luck out in finding anything nasty, they will insure the title, as a gamble, on your named amount. There is always a chance that a record was missed, especially when they play hide and seek with you on the computers, so even if you sit at the county office, and thoroughly examine all the records, and even pay the staff there to do the search for you, with consideration, there is a way to submarine a fake, ancient document, from say 1834, that voids the validity of all the rest of the title transfer deeds ever since then, and under this system of land purchases with hide and seek, nonpublic county land records, all you're purchasing is pretty much air. And if you purchase title insurance in a given amount from an insurance corporation, nothing guarantees that that corporation won't take your money, pocket it, then simply go out of business and restart as a new one. Kinda like lifetime dialup ISP's in the 90's were. For $99 one time fee, we give you a lifetime dialup internet acccess. You know how that pyramid scheme works? They take your 99 dollars, give you internet for a couple months, pay the CEO millions in salaries, take up all kinds of business loans from banks, then simply go bankrupt, out of business, and restart a new business. Wash, rinse, repeat, take your money and run with it, is what land title insurance companies are too. So all you're buying when you buy a title to a land is air, hocus pocus. What else can you do though? How can you find yourself a place to live in peace, as the nearest communist public lands, that are nobody's private property, called state parks or natural reservations, maybe half a state across from you, where you can go and just be with any right, other than that everything else is private property, and you don't have the right to be present there, including you don't have the right to sleep in your car at a 24x7 Walmart parking lot, if Walmart says so on a displayed banner right under the parking lot cameras.

Re: LOL

[Redbehrend]

I hold NASA to the same standards and am mad already at them for somehow over complicating simple projects recently. They really need to restructure NASA right now as times have changed.

Re:LOL

[Meski]

Not so much the rock itself, there's many similar rocks with similar minerals. It's all about the mining infrastructure you build there. Or about portable infrastructure that does the mining, for convenience lets call it a spaceship. Now if I was building such an object, it'd have a lot in the way of defence systems on it, to ensure that the blood shed would be someone else's...

Is it just me...

[mythosaz]

Is it just me, or does the phrase "a space law expert at the University of Mississippi" cause you to giggle just a little bit?

Re: Is it just me...

[BradBajos]

Yes

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got to admit, it's a hell of a niche. Once you're in, you're in for life.

Re:Is it just me...

[plopez]

I thought The University of Mississippi was a football team....

Re:Is it just me...

[marcello_dl]

Besides, that guy doesn't know ANYTHING.

Mining asteroids!

You see, when you hit an asteroid it fragments in many little ones that begin spreading around, so you have to hit all of them too and escape from them at the same time, and every now and then an alien ship comes around and start shooting creating even more chaos.

LEAVE ASTEROIDS ALONE.

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

And as propulsion and other space technologies continue to get cheaper, more people will look to you for comments, bringing you the STARBUCKS.

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there was this one time that a Batarian terrorist tried to crash an asteroid into Terra Nova, but that shit got HANDLED, and only a few hostages wound up dead, along with said terrorist.

Re:Is it just me...

[Teancum]

There is current application of space law in terms of being an extension of international law though. Commercial enterprises working in a space environment or having a significant part or feature of their business (speaking about just space-related assets) is now a multi-billion dollar enterprise. Much of that is of course in the telecommunications industry (where it gets tricky to distinguish what is an Earth-based asset and what is space-based), but it also includes some emerging industries including mining operations.

It is a real academic discipline, and surprisingly the University of Mississippi is one of the major centers. Giggle all you want, this guy is cited in professional journals and taken seriously by executives at companies who conduct business activities in space. The guys that have the bucks matter, not some casual poster on Slashdot.

Re:Is it just me...

[Dahamma]

Either you replied to the wrong comment or the whoosh over your head sounded something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm going to call BS on you. why? you repeatedly refer to 'this guy' that you are defending...and it is clearly a woman 'Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz'

Re:Is it just me...

[d'baba]

LEAVE ROIDS ALONE.

Sage advice

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice Ender's Game reference (or Earth Unaware to be more specific).

MUNOBWCCBISFA

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Making Up Names Of Bills With Cleverly Crafted Backronyms Is So Fucking Annoying.

Re:MUNOBWCCBISFA

[Ralph Wiggam]

This one is pretty good, though. Way better than the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act.

Re:MUNOBWCCBISFA

[Anonymous Coward]

A swift kick in the nuts is preferable to that one.

Re: MUNOBWCCBISFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately you get both.

Re: MUNOBWCCBISFA

[sound vision]

Not to mention a thick hard cock up the ass.

Re: MUNOBWCCBISFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Resources a person or entity has orbital control over are theirs. Time for a good old fashioned gold rush!

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[sillybilly]

And there's gotta be a ton of gold at the center of the earth, and platinum, same at the center of the Moon. The Big Dig. How low can you go. Inside the Moon, it does not get very hot, no molten lava to contend with. Who can get there first, and start the digging for them heavy noble elements of platinum, iridium, osmium, gold, all mixed in with nickel and iron. If the theory that the Moon was ejected from the Earth from a massive asteroid impact is correct. Inner planets don't have much moons, for whatever reason, our Moon is special. If the Moon was ejected in a molten lava state, then the heavy, non-oxygen-bound stuff (such as noble metals) had a chance to stratify and collect at the core (It's kind of interesting that there'd be any gold and platinum in the lithosphere of Earth, but volcanoes spit stuff up from real deep, moreover a lot of our nickel-platinum mines are actually asteroid-meteorite crash sites embedded into the lithosphere, that did not have a chance to sink deep.) All they gotta do is some seismic listening experiments to see if the Moon has a dense core, unless you can see through it with ultrahigh energy xrays or even neutrino observations, something that goes through it, and then you don't need seismic experiments. But otherwise it's time to blow some nukes up on the Moon, and place seismic sensors throughout its surface, to listen and probe its internal structure. If it has a core, and it's not molten, it's time for that gold rush, or more like platinum-nickel rush.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[CreatureComfort]

To anyone who sues over this chuck of space rock I claim, fine, I'll send it right to you...

Problem solved...

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[gatfirls]

Money and power are 10/10ths of the law.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[TWX]

I really don't want to see the moon explode from overmining and inadequate safety precautions though.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[brainboyz]

That was my first thought. Who's going to argue with someone who maintains navigational control over very large rocks in orbit? Drop the investigation/case or I vaporize your city with a 50m rock.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the thing, even if the asteroids were made of 100% pure gold, it's still a losing proposition.

If you want to become a millionaire mining asteroids, the best way is to start as a billionaire.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[k6mfw]

I was thinking some private group or company snags an asteroid says, "alright if you want me, come and get me. In the meantime, neeeyaa, neeeyaa, neeeyaa!"

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the shockwave that's the real problem here. Imagine all of the destroyed china!

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Teancum]

The Moon has more surface area that North America. Even if all of the nations of the Earth conspired and made a deliberate effort to explode the Moon, it can't be done. Mining operations that would produce minerals in quantities equal to the entire mining production of humanity from before the Sumerian empires until now and doing that on an annual basis would take billions of years to mine out enough of the Moon for you to even notice something was happening.

Relax, the Moon is going to be just fine even with extensive strip mining, and arguably it is better to have it happen up there than down here on the Earth while killing habitat for many animals and destroying whole ecosystems.

Only the smallest of asteroids will ever be completely mined out before mankind will have settled and occupied the rest of the Milky Way Galaxy.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Beck_Neard]

It's true that mining asteroids is of little use for us here on Earth. But when you consider raw materials for space industry, then it suddenly becomes an extremely attractive idea. But the problem is that without cheap materials and a cheap way of accessing space, no space industry is ever likely to develop. So it's kind of a chicken-egg problem.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[noidentity]

Sounds like your space rock "chuck" should be consulted before any lawsuit.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[UnknownSoldier]

> If the theory that the Moon was ejected from the Earth from a massive asteroid impact is correct.

It is not. The moon is a billion years older then the earth.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[sillybilly]

Take a good look at it. The Moon may not be there in a couple generations anymore, but all turned into space stations. I give it about 500 years before it's gone.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[sillybilly]

It may take millions of year for a limited number of humans. You forget about the near infinite ability to breed and multiply.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[sillybilly]

How do you know? Also, if that's true, was it ever molten, does it have a high density metal core?

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Teancum]

I haven't forgotten the multiplicitive nature of human reproduction or how life will spread. Millions of years from now mankind is likely going to be spreading to other Galaxies and doing things you would not even comprehend at the moment. Human populations also seem to somehow stabilize when constrained with resources (sometimes in ugly ways, but it does happen). Space is huge and there will be many other places to worry about than a mined out Moon.

Who knows, there may even be a lunar restoration group wanting to make it look as pristine as when Neil Armstrong first walked on it.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[MickLinux]

I think you're off by at least one order of magnitude (if the way you go about it is smart), maybe two.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[ihtoit]

> If the theory that the Moon was ejected from the Earth from a massive asteroid impact is correct.

It is not. The moon is a billion years older then the earth.

uh, other way. The Moon, according to the latest theory, formed when a Mars-sized planet collided with Earth, the two iron cores merged and the Moon formed from mainly quartz and SiO2 ejecta - which is the reason why the Moon has no appreciable magnetic field and Earth has a much larger nickel-iron core than it should have.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[ihtoit]

5 billion, more like. It's receding at an inch or two a year.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[DanielRavenNest]

Elon Musk is working on the cheap access to space part of the problem, and I'm working on the other part.

That other part is a "Seed Factory", an industrial starter kit that makes parts for more machines in an expanding collection, using local raw materials and energy. So instead of having to send a whole asteroid processing plant, which would be pretty massive, you send a much smaller starter kit. We're about to buy a property near Atlanta to build and test prototypes for this concept. The first generation factories will be for Earth use, by the 3rd or 4th generation we should be ready for space use. In between we plan to do difficult and remote locations on Earth, like the oceans, deserts, and ice caps. That should give us experience in remote control.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[TWX]

Human populations also seem to somehow stabilize when constrained with resources (sometimes in ugly ways, but it does happen).

I don't think that's true in the slightest. Poor, resource-starved populations have the most children. Populations with opportunity and means have the fewest children.

If you want a specific case that can be looked at, look at the population of Gaza from the formal founding of Israel through today. The population absolutely exploded in number between then and now, and that's arguably one of the hardest places to live in the world.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[ihtoit]

by "starter kit", are we to read "factory factory"? As in, a relatively small robotic facility designed and programmed to locate, mine, refine and form mineral resources into larger parts and structures, mechanics and consumables such as larger cutting heads, eventually to clone itself writ large, ready to receive instructions for new and varied structures such as habitation, airponics modules, etc? Because that would be fucking cool.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious. I bet you have a nice Magic The Gathering card set too.

Re: Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, replicators. Too bad by the time this is reality Mc Gyver will be dead and cant go blow them up when they try to kill us all.

Re:Possession is nine-tenths of the law...

[painandgreed]

How do you know? Also, if that's true, was it ever molten, does it have a high density metal core?

Not sure how UnknownSoldier knows that. It certainly doesn't jive with what I've been hearing for the last 20 years since I was in school for physics. Current theory is that the proto Earth was hit by a proto Moon about the size of Mars. Part of the proto-Moon ejected from the collision, unfortunately, the heavy metal cores of both the proto-Earth and proto-Moon stayed with the Earth so the moon does not have a similar metal core and is mostly mantel material. Also, the proto-Moon ejection formed two bodies which re-collided fairly non-violently as things go with the other bit now smooshed onto the back side of the moon.

Huh

[koan]

If I pay for the equipment whatever I get is mine and mien alone unless I decide to share.
Bullshit hippie economics from the 60's aside of course.

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

Without these hippies, the solar systems ressources would already belong to whoever claim property first and futur entrepreneurs would have to pay a share of their earnbings to absentee landlords.

Re:Huh

[timeOday]

That's like saying you can take a car so long as you own the slim jim you use to get in it. You didn't make the asteroid, or oil deposit, or whatever it is. You have no inherent right to it.

Re:Huh

[nschubach]

What if you just charged what it cost to get the material, shipping, and such? Who cares who it belongs to as long as you are the one mining and transporting it (for an exorbitant fee...)

Re:Huh

[koan]

No but I paid to go get it, so I get to decide what happens, or have you not noticed the way things work?

Re:Huh

[koan]

Read your own sig.

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

That is correct. You can take a car if you own a slim jim.

Re:Huh

[ihtoit]

uh, no it's not. Taking someone else's property isn't the same as extracting something that was in the ground possibly inaccessible through economic or technical limitations to anybody else.

Stupid problem that isn't even a problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody owns it yet. You retrieve it, it's yours.

treaty disallows homesteading everywhere but earth

[Anonymous Coward]

how is that possible in the first place? Homesteading applies here.

Well whose is it then?

[Anonymous Coward]

If they bring it back, what, they're going to divide it 7 billion ways?

Re:Well whose is it then?

[plopez]

that seems fair

As a private citizen

[Spy Handler]

I am not bound by treaty. I am bound only by the laws of my country.

If Congress says I can keep the gold I just mined off Ceres, it's mine. Would the Russian government come after me for their share? Good luck to them.

Re:As a private citizen

[mpeskett]

To look at it from the opposite end, if your country is abiding by their treaty obligations then they may feel compelled to make laws reflecting it, which you are then subject to. That is of course a pretty big "if" - if they've decided not to abide by it then it becomes a question of what consequences they're either willing to concede to or able to have forced upon them by whoever's on the other end of the treaty.

If your hypothetical asteroid miner were from a smaller country, one less able to dictate terms to the rest of the world, they might find themselves subject to rather more outside interference...

Re:As a private citizen

[WillAffleckUW]

Technically, no.

You are bound by the treaties your country signed. In fact, they have more legal weight in the US than laws passed by your own Congress.

As an example, the US has signed Data Treaties with the EU and with Canada that give citizens of those countries more rights to privacy than you as an American would have (exception: if you are also a citizen of an EU country or Canada, you gain those rights in the US as well).

Same goes for any treaties signed for non-countries such as Antarctica (which you are bound to) and space (where those exist).

That's the law. That you choose to be a space pirate, is your own problem. I recommend wearing a gold colored space pirate outfit, with a cape and a cool helmet.

Re:As a private citizen

[jwbales]

I'm with spy handler. Anyone with the technology and the ability to mine the moon, Mars, asteroids, etc. satisfies the basic requirements of ownership. But it is also important for the US or other government to guarantee property rights in an orderly, lawful fashion. The alternative is anarchy, where no ones rights are recognized or protected. And the gods forbid that the band of outlaws called the United Nations ever get involved.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Putin sent a special message: "I want to remind you that Russia is one of the leading nuclear powers"

I'm not sure exactly who he was talking to but it was just a friendly reminder., so, good luck with that.

Re:As a private citizen

[phayes]

The Space treaty may make it illegal but no sanctions are specified. If the USG depenalizes space homesteading and allows people to sell ressources brought back from space, the treaty will be dead. Prior examples: The treaties the USG signed & then ignored with Indian tribes during the 19th century.

Re:As a private citizen

[WillAffleckUW]

Kind of doubting we will see space wagon trains

Re:As a private citizen

[bill_mcgonigle]

Technically, no.
You are bound by the treaties your country signed.

You mean mean, 'in theory', not 'technically'. If the local jurisdiction does not enforce the laws, then on a technical basis you are not bound by them. On a theoretical basis you may be, but who cares.

That's the law. That you choose to be a space pirate, is your own problem.

You can't take the sky from me!

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Putin says lots of things, do you honestly believe everything he says? He just likes the attention like Julian Assange does.

Re:As a private citizen

[angel'o'sphere]

You got it all wromg!
If I mine some tonnes of gold on Ceres and the Russian government says: it is all mine except for import tarrifs, them I may keep it!
Good luck for the american congress!

Besides I'm German, and if I nad the capacity to mine gold on an asteroid I certainly woukd not 'land' it in a nation but in international waters.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with spy handler. Anyone with the technology and the ability to mine the moon, Mars, asteroids, etc. satisfies the basic requirements of ownership. But it is also important for the US or other government to guarantee property rights in an orderly, lawful fashion. The alternative is anarchy, where no ones rights are recognized or protected. And the gods forbid that the band of outlaws called the United Nations ever get involved.

Hmm, I could agree with that, but I still think it falls down to what you can 'control/defend'. I mean, the US is in North America, but it doesn't own, say, the Canadian Tar Sands (well, US companies may have investment there, but it's "Canadian land") right? Ghana and Nigeria are both on the African continent, but they don't "own" each others resources - their respective governments might, or might have sold the land (or just mining/drilling rights) to another country/multinational corp.

For a small asteroid basic ownership might work, but the moon? Mars? We planted an American flag on the moon, does that mean we "own" the entire moon? If some group sets up a mining operation on Mars, do they "own" Mars? Or do they merely have rights to a "claim" that they staked out to mine (say a nice vein of copper ore)?

The complexity is, if nobody "owns" it, who can give "mining rights" to it? What rules/laws govern? I would think something along the lines of the deep sea shipwreck exploring might hold in a way...

Re:As a private citizen

[Teancum]

The problem is that the treaty obligations of the USA are silent on the matter of private ownership of extra-terrestrial real estate and minerals. In other words, there are no obligations to get in the way. On the other hand, the major spacefaring nations of Mexico and Australia do have treaty obligations that prohibit their citizens from engaging in this kind of mining operation.

I wonder how long it will take for Mexico and Australia to back out of those treaties and get into the gold rush in the Solar System?

Re:As a private citizen

[Teancum]

The Outer Space Treaty doesn't even make it illegal. It only prevents sovereign claims upon the territory. It can be debated as to if a U.S. citizen claiming extra-terrestrial real estate might constitute a sovereignty claim as well, and certainly a group of citizens forming a town out of their privately held land and applying for U.S. territorial status will constitute a sovereignty claim, but that is still up in the air.

Besides, the USA can also simply state openly to all of the signatory parties "I don't want to be in this treaty anymore", wait a year, and that treaty will have zero impact of any kind. Basically, all Congress needs to do is take a private territorial claim and wait a year before it can be formally recognized or even granted statehood. It took longer than that for California to become a state.

Re: As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Until a bounty hunter comes after your head. Then you'd better run for the Oort Cloud and say goodbye to all your minions.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Congress can decriminalize it, buy it's still subject to civil forfeiture as long as the treaty is valid. In other words, we'd have to break the treaty officially in order for private citizen's/companies to be assured all their space assets weren't seized by a federal judicial ruling. Good luck getting investors to back that play without further clarification.

Re:As a private citizen

[Patent Lover]

Sure glad we have that treaty. Otherwise the NSA and other agencies would be spying on our communications.

Re:As a private citizen

[cascadingstylesheet]

exception: if you are also a citizen of an EU country or Canada, you gain those rights in the US as well

Seeing how the US doesn't recognize dual citizenship, I'm not sure I'd bank on that.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Treaties even have more legal weight than the Constitution in the real world. ACTA trespassed on a number of the Bill of Rights, but should that have gotten passed, it would be the law of the land, even though it went through just the Prez and 2/3 of the Senate. The right wingers have fought tooth and nail, so the gun-grabbers have been trying to get their gun ban treaty enacted. Were it to go through, it would supersede the Second Amendment in the real world. The trade treaties which allow China to own 51% of ventures on their soil, but don't have to worry about import duties on US soil are also unconstitutional.

So, treaties are scary stuff.

Re:As a private citizen

[Jeremi]

if I had the capacity to mine gold on an asteroid I certainly woukd not 'land' it in a nation but in international waters.

Given the relative densities of gold and water, you might want to reconsider that plan ;^)

Re:As a private citizen

[jmichaelg]

We don't have to break the treaty. We can withdraw from the treaty instead. From the treaty

Article XVI
  Any State Party to the Treaty may give notice of its withdrawal from the
Treaty one year after its entry into force by written notification to the Depositary
Governments. Such withdrawal shall take effect one year from the date of receipt of
this notification.

Re:As a private citizen

[golodh]

If you believe that, then any ' citizen" of the "Khalifate" (ISIS), North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, or whoever can make the very same claim with the same amount of justification.

And who's to say they're in the wrong to just install a missile battery in orbit to "reclaim their property" or to extract "reasonable compensation" from returning mining vessels?

Or even to send their own mining vessels (possibly armed) to the very same asteroids that Congress so graciously told you that you can keep the mining proceeds of?

The kind of attitude you display leads straight to armed conflict (if the rewards are high enough). Are you prepared to fight that conflict and hold the rest of us harmless from it, both financially and militarily?

Somehow I doubt that.

And last but not least: how about giving private citizens and private companies the power to mess about with chunks of rock near Earth's orbit? And what if those clowns decide it makes financial sense to install a motor on a really big asteroid and push it into earth orbit (for easier access)? And how about if North Korea or the Khalifate do that?

A little less short-sightedness there please.

Re:As a private citizen

[ultranova]

Besides I'm German, and if I nad the capacity to mine gold on an asteroid I certainly woukd not 'land' it in a nation but in international waters.

I guess that's one way to make pirates leave cargo ships alone...

Re: As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Putin can easily make any economic recovery in Europe impossible. Russia can trade with India and China, and Europeans have now to mend ties with Big Bear Russia while being careful not to enrage Uncle "we bomb the shit out of everyone" Sam. So as a European I know I have to listen closely to what Putin has to say. If push comes to shove, it will be Brussels who suffers, not Washington DC.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

No treaty can infringe rights the people decide are retained by them under the 9th Amendment, or reserved to them under the 10th. That's the law.

Getting power hungry idiots in government, and the massively unethical US legal profession, to obey the law is another matter entirely.

Re:As a private citizen

[dk20]

Right up until the president to signs another "executive order" outlawing the ownership of gold?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

Re:As a private citizen

[ihtoit]

you are bound by the laws of your country, yes, you are also bound by treaty where stipulated. Fortunately, the outer space treaty makes no restriction on commercial exploitation of space by private entities, so... wow, how many times does it have to be said, and why haven't any of these so called big shot fucking lawyers picked up on this minor technicality yet?... there is nothing stopping you from hitching a ride on the next SpaceX launcher, sticking a grapple into the next passing asteroid, bringing it back to Earth for a soft landing and saying "MINE!". There would be a problem in the United States Government claiming the Moon for the United States, which is why after the Outer Space Treaty was finally ratified the plaque was changed from "For the People of the United States" to "For All Mankind".

Re:As a private citizen

[ihtoit]

ownership of extracted materials, yes. Ownership of territory, as in tracts of the Moon for your own exclusive use? That's a sovereignty claim, and according to the Outer Space Treaty, that's a "no".

Re:As a private citizen

[ihtoit]

because the Outer Space Treaty specifically prohibits the deployment of weapons systems in space.

Thank you, come again.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the USA we're talking about. They only expect other countries to abide by the rules they make.

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Technically, no.

You are bound by the treaties your country signed. In fact, they have more legal weight in the US than laws passed by your own Congress.

As an example, the US has signed Data Treaties with the EU and with Canada that give citizens of those countries more rights to privacy than you as an American would have (exception: if you are also a citizen of an EU country or Canada, you gain those rights in the US as well).

Same goes for any treaties signed for non-countries such as Antarctica (which you are bound to) and space (where those exist).

That's the law. That you choose to be a space pirate, is your own problem. I recommend wearing a gold colored space pirate outfit, with a cape and a cool helmet.

One could always waive ones national citizenship and claim to be a citizen of Alpha Centauri.

Re:As a private citizen

[angel'o'sphere]

Well, a golden 'rod from sky' through a pirate ship would be funny, too!

Re:As a private citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not true. I know several people who are dual citizens.

finders keepers

[jsepeta]

losers weepers, beyotch

Moon is a harsh mistress...

[PaulBu]

I would say that an entity that managed to get there and posess some mined material up the Earth gravity well can probably deal with attempts to de-legalize it rather efficiently. ;-)

Paul B.

acronym

[acdc_rules]

i've worked for the government and seen some doozy acronyms, but ASTEROID has got to be the best I've ever seen. it even stands for something that makes sense. bravo to to coiner.

Precident has been set

[Obscene_CNN]

Barringer Crater mineral rights were granted to Daniel Barringer in 1903 thus granting him owner ship of the iron from that meteor. So if minerals are brought back to earth, they belong to who ever brought them back. In space however its up to them to keep them. Note: the outer Space treaty only applies to governments, not individuals or corporations.

Re:Precident has been set

[Anonymous Coward]

The moon rocks brought back by the Apollo missions constitute another precedent. The US government seems to think that those rocks belong to them.

Re:Precident has been set

[edjs]

Note: the outer Space treaty only applies to governments, not individuals or corporations.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/...

Article VI

States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compliance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.

Re:Precident has been set

[TWX]

Barringer Crater was a pre-existing landform that wasn't even confirmed to be of extraterrestrial origin until Shoemaker's 1960-ish PhD thesis. Granted, there was suspicion that it was from a meteorite impact, but the theories up until Shoemaker's were all incorrect.

Barringer's claim was granted because it was land, not becuase it was extraterrestrial. Barringer owned the land and got mineral rights to it, and while he may have expected a large iron core, the office granting those rights did it because of it being land.

Re:Precident has been set

[phayes]

So? If the USG decides to ignore the treaties, like it did with the treaties it signed with the Indian nations during the 19th century, the space treaty will be meaningless.

Re:Precident has been set

[silfen]

States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty.

So what? It wouldn't be the first treaty anybody has broken. Are there any penalties? Who is going to enforce them? And, in any case, the US could simply leave the treaty or demand it be renegotiated. The Outer Space Treaty simply isn't going to last in its current form, and it should last in its current form. Get used to it. Treaties aren't binding law, they are simply mutual agreements to help make things work more smoothly.

In any case, private space companies could simply move to countries that haven't ratified the treaty, and they wouldn't be in violation of any treaty or international law.

Re:Precident has been set

[Anonymous Coward]

Treaties aren't binding law,

Actually, they are. In fact international treaties trumps national laws. Don't like it, don't sign/ratify the treaty.

Re:Precident has been set

[Anonymous Coward]

Treaties aren't binding law,

Actually, they are. In fact international treaties trumps national laws. Don't like it, don't sign/ratify the treaty.

Yup, that's why the US rarely signs treaties. And, well, ignores them when sticky things like "human rights" get in the way of their bombing missions and military conquests.

Re:Precident has been set

[careysub]

Barringer Crater was a pre-existing landform that wasn't even confirmed to be of extraterrestrial origin until Shoemaker's 1960-ish PhD thesis. Granted, there was suspicion that it was from a meteorite impact, but the theories up until Shoemaker's were all incorrect.

Come again? The theory that it was a meteor impact was actually incorrect until Shoemaker found high-pressure quartz polymorphs? The preponderance of evidence supported it being a meteor impact decades before that, there were no other plausible explanations for the formation that fit the evidence. The discovery of the polymorphs coesite and stishovite provided a unique unambiguous indicator, but in no way was required to demonstrate that the meteor crater explanation was correct. The real significance of the polymorph discovery was to provide reliable indicators for other formations of uncertain origin. The original Shoemaker paper (Science, Vol. 132, p. 220, 1960) makes no claim that it "proved" that Meteor Crater was a meteor crater, the paper assumes that as a known fact.

Re: Precident has been set

[kellymcdonald78]

Read article 16 of the treaty. All anyone has to do it give 1 year notice to withdraw

Re:Precident has been set

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe in your country, but not in the United States.

Re:Precident has been set

[TWX]

The impact theory that led Barringer to buy the crater assumed that the impactor would be the same size as the crater, and buried below the basin. He expected to make a fortune off of iron mining.

The other theories were related to vulcanism, as that part of the Colorado Plateau has lots of volcanic features within an hours' drive. I know because I just went on a geology field trip organized through a buddy of mine from the geology department at our University. It was rather amusing, watching the tour guides at the crater visitor's center asking him questions.

Re:Precident has been set

[ihtoit]

uh... the Apollo astronauts were employees of the US Government, ergo whatever they brought back did belong to the US Government as extracted samples.

Re:Precident has been set

[careysub]

The other theories of formation (volcanism, subsidence, etc.) had been discredited by the late 1920s, leaving the meteor impact theory the only one left standing. And there was a lot of good evidence supporting it (finely pulverized rock under the crater floor, the meteoric iron under the crater found by drilling, etc.). There was no controversy about the crater's origin, had been none for decades, when Shoemaker found the polymorphs. I know, because I read the original published literature - from the teens, twenties and thirties, Shoemaker's paper on Meteor Crater, AZ, his subsequent paper where he showed that the Ries Basin was an impact feature due to the polymorph presence (this was the first real case where it was crucial in making the determination), and also Shoemaker's obit in Science, which does not assert that he proved the nature of Meteor Crater.

Your geology department field trip may have been passing along a "good story" rather than a critical examination of the literature.

Congress can repeal treaty

[ZombieBraintrust]

Congress can modify or repeal treaties by subsequent legislative action, even if this amounts to a violation of the treaty under international law.

Re:Congress can repeal treaty

[Anonymous Coward]

Under international law, it can't. Congress can decide to disregard treaties, but it can't change the fact that the treaty exists and says what it says and is binding under international law on the United States. The President can denounce the treaty (where the text of the treaty permits that), or can try to negotiate an amendment with the other parties.

One source of confusion is that the word "treaty" has a different meaning under US constitutional law than international law. Under international law, any legally binding agreement between two states is a treaty. Under US constitutional law, only those agreements ratified by the Senate are called "treaties", other treaties (in the international law sense) are called "agreements". A treaty ratified by the Senate is simultaneously both a treaty and domestic legislation - it is potentially self-executing if the text of the treaty permits it - whereas a treaty not ratified by the Senate always needs separate Congressional legislation to enforce it under domestic law. As such, Congress can amend or repeal the domestic law effects of a treaty ratified by the Senate - but Congress has no power to affect the treaty itself as it exists under international law. Only the President has the power to denounce treaties or negotiate amendments to them.

Re:Congress can repeal treaty

[Teancum]

Unless the treaty has an "escape clause", which the Outer Space Treaty has. Basically Congress can force a renegotiation of this particular treaty or simply set it aside by legislation. There is a one year notification period where the USA will need to abide by the restrictions of this particular treaty, but once that year is up.... it is as if the treaty never existed in the first place.

Not everybody is happy with that clause, and many people talking about this in the past have argued that this clause will never be invoked without another treaty with all of the current signers agreeing to a new treaty, but it still there.

Also, Congress can pass legislation requiring the President of the USA to engage in various actions. This is even fairly common place where legislation is written like "The Secretary shall..." or "The President shall..." Such legislation could certainly be drafted that in effect makes it an impeachable offense for the President to refuse to denounce a treaty (and very likely the President would simply do what Congress has asked in this case too). While technically it would still have to pass through the hands of the President, the policy decision itself can be decided simply by Congress.... much like how in the UK Parliament passes legislation that gets the Queen's assent but the Queen really didn't get to decide what was in that legislation.

mid 1900s optimism

[Anonymous Coward]

The treaty was stupid and anyone who signed it should be shot for gross incompetence. Simple fact is their are resources and unless we are one world communist country every damn thing in space will have a price tag attached.

I full expect China to mine for shit as well. So we might as well get this space race on the way now.

Re:mid 1900s optimism

[Anonymous Coward]

So you'd prefer all those outer space bodies to belong to whoever claimed it first so that when you go mine them, you get sued for trespassing and get asked to surrender all the stuff you brought back to earth?

Re:mid 1900s optimism

[silfen]

I think the treaty was OK in the sense that it prevented an arms race in space and the threat of bombardment from space. That was a good thing to agree on. Let's hold on to that for as long as we can.

Prohibitions on asteroid mining, on the other hand, serve no purpose. Either they get renegotiated, or they simply get ignored. Countries that haven't ratified the treaty aren't bound by them anyway.

Re:mid 1900s optimism

[ultranova]

The treaty was stupid and anyone who signed it should be shot for gross incompetence. Simple fact is their are resources and unless we are one world communist country every damn thing in space will have a price tag attached.

No, every damn thing in space doesn't have a price tag attached, because they aren't actually owned by anyone. Or should I be able to simply declare the Moon my property and seek to extract rent from anyone who builds a base on it, possibly decades in the future?

The treaty exists to keep people and nations from getting into fights over claims on places they can't even reach.

Jurisdiction

[symbolset]

What happens in low Earth Orbit and above is none of their business

Re:Jurisdiction

[brainboyz]

I would say the same thing, but there are several countries that can effectively impose their will anywhere within the Moon's orbit and a handful that could manage anything within the solar system. That said, having navigational control of a big rock on the edge of a gravity well may prove to be a hefty bargaining chip.

Re:Jurisdiction

[CaptnZilog]

I would say the same thing, but there are several countries that can effectively impose their will anywhere within the Moon's orbit and a handful that could manage anything within the solar system. That said, having navigational control of a big rock on the edge of a gravity well may prove to be a hefty bargaining chip.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. :-P

Re:Jurisdiction

[dryeo]

it's like being a nuclear power, actually using the hefty bargaining chip is a form of suicide, perhaps like a suicide bomber where you take out the enemy while dieing (with the advantage you get to see the results before dieing) but still a suicide. As long as the space power is dependent on the Earth, it is suicide to piss off the Earth powers and it will be a long time, if ever, before anyone can support a space age technological society independent of the Earth.

Re:Jurisdiction

[ultranova]

What happens in low Earth Orbit and above is none of their business

Nice satellite you have there. Would be a shame if a laser beam hit it. Good thing I'm selling "insurance".

Re: Jurisdiction

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? You destroy a couple of cities and then blackmail the whole of the Earth. What are they going to do? If they try to come for you, you destroy more cities. If they cut you off, you do the same. In the end Earth governments will see the light and cave in because it's the smart thing to do, especially since your first strike will have wiped away the superpowers which could have threatened you.

Barriers will fall once the money comes rolling in

[wiredlogic]

As soon as space mining becomes practical on the near horizon Congress will take the necessary action to legalize it. Otherwise they risk losing all of the money and jobs (not to mention the brib... er campaign contributions) from the support services that would go to non-US companies in countries who aren't signatories to the treaty.

Ownership of spacecraft

[Anonymous Coward]

Article VIII of the treaty states:

"Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth."

So if someone attached rocket engines to a small asteroid and moved it, for example, that could be considered "constructing an object" and they would own the whole thing, including the asteroid which is one of its "component parts".

Re:Ownership of spacecraft

[Anonymous Coward]

All you'd need to do is create a subsurface habitat (dig a hole); claim the whole thing as part of the habitat's structure, which is actually true since you'd want to build underground to protect against radiation, solar wind, and cosmic rays..

Re:Ownership of spacecraft

[CoolGopher]

You're a patent lawyer, aren't you? ;)

Really?

[frank_adrian314159]

This is what the idiots on the House science committee think is their most useful work to do at this time? Making space "safe" for mineral interests? Fuck, I can't believe that this is the most immediate concern in science (or even space, for that matter).

I can hear it now in Chair Lamar Smith's office: So what do we do today to look busy? I know, we'll have hearings on a symbolic bill that is unenforceable and will never get to the floor, let alone pass, but, since most people don't know that, it should be easy to spin it as about good American capitalists (yay!) getting that awful world government (boo!) and pesky things like the treaties we don't like (boo!) out of the way, so our good American capitalists (yay!) can make money (yay!) and create jobs (yay!). I'm pretty sure that's about how deep the analysis goes on the political side. Then there's just the money side with the Democratic congressman from the great state of Boeing providing bi-partisan cover.

Those idiots need to be voted out.

And Big Corperation's response to this treaty...

[cdu13a]

move the corporate headquarters off world.

They already move their headquarters out of the country to avoid paying taxes.
What's to stop them from moving corporate headquarters off world to avoid treaties?

I don't believe anybody has any treaties or laws against trading with entities that don't live on earth, and if a company has the ability to conduct large scale mining in space then they probably have the ability to make a reasonable claim that their corporation is based on that astroid.

That only works if you dig up immortality...

[denzacar]

...or happiness.

Everything else you have to be able to TRADE or it is worthless or illegal to trade or posses.
And while there is a long and fruitful career to be had in trading illegal shit, they tend to end abruptly and violently.

More like ASTFEROIDS

[Anonymous Coward]

Amirite?

I wonder how much time (and money) the braintrust in Washington spends coming up with these absurd acronyms.

Yet another piece of paper

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, that idea doesn't really mesh at all with the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 ...

Since when, in the history of the USA, has it EVER honored any treaties it has signed? It's like the Constitution, another piece of paper for them to ignore.

Legality Smeegality

[tyggna]

Space is a resource that will belong to whomever has the capacity to claim it first

Re: Legality Smeegality

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. For the short time before someone else claim it by force, usually by threatening or killing the first guy here on Earth.

it's just a treaty

[silfen]

Congress can very much make asteroid mining legal for Americans; for an American to break a treaty entered into by the US government isn't, by itself, illegal. Calling it "a violation of international law" is really a misnomer, since "international law" isn't "law" in the usual sense of the word. There is no judicial branch of government enforcing international law, no constitutional principles governing it, no consent of the governed.

If Congress decides to make asteroid mining legal, it may or may not be a treaty violation on the part of the US, but so what? Treaties aren't binding law, nor are they immutable, they are merely agreements between states and are renegotiable.

Those moon rocks sure look owned

[Kjella]

Try not stealing one since the US government doesn't own them and I think you'll find yourself in jail. Any takers who'd like to bet otherwise? I think in practice this is resolved already, what you bring back to Earth is yours. The fun parts would be that nobody has mining rights, if you find a big gold vein there's nothing stopping another country/company dropping a mining rig right next to yours.

Re:Those moon rocks sure look owned

[mbone]

That's what that "non-interference" bit is about.

mod Up

[Anonymous Coward]

of all legitimAte the point more

There is a loophole however

[Plazmid]

While the outer space treaty prohibits countries from claiming celestial bodies as their own, Article VIII states that a country "shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or CONSTRUCTED on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth."

Which means that if one might be able to claim an asteroid by by bolting a spacecraft to an the asteroid and stating that the asteroid is now a spacecraft part that was constructed when holes were drilled into the asteroid.

Written in stone no doubt

[Dereck1701]

And treaties are written in stone? History is repeat with treaties that are no longer enforced or even acknowledged by any current country. The day someone starts shipping down millions of dollars in precious metals from an asteroid is the day that either countries simply start ignoring the Outer Space Treaty en mass or the day it is "reinterpreted" to allow such pursuits.

Re:Written in stone no doubt

[khallow]

Even if it were written in stone, we have the following:

Article XVI

Any State Party to the Treaty may give notice of its withdrawal from the Treaty one year after its entry into force by written notification to the Depositary Governments. Such withdrawal shall take effect one year from the date of receipt of this notification.

Just written notice and one year later you are free of the entanglements of the treaty and it's just as written into stone as the rest of the treaty. That's why having Congress pass laws like this is interesting. It provides an easily attainable alternate framework to the original treaty.

laws in space

[Anonymous Coward]

are there any crimes in space?

Communism.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's good that, at least for space, the US and the USSR agreed on the superior method of allocating resources.

It's a shame that neither society was remotely communist.

Workaround to the treaty is trivial - reflag it

[sargeUSMC]

If you are from a nation bound by the treaty, reflag your vessel (nuwclear wessell) to a non-treaty country.

Rocks in spaaaace

[BringsApples]

So, the earth is divided into many countries. Why not just go ahead and assume that all rocks in space (the Earth is a rock in space too) are to be split up as they are on Earth? The whole idea of ownership in this way is to silly to come up with a plan in one day, given our current laws, as those laws weren't gotten in one day either. It'll take many years before anything will become of this. We haven't even gotten to the part where some religious stance claims that God sent the rock here for some Heaven's Gate shit - making it holy ground.

Simple... squatter's rights.

[mark-t]

Wherever you are, it belongs to you, and nobody else has any right to tell you to be elsewhere. You are at liberty to sell, rent, or share it with others as long as you remain there. Your ownership ceases as soon as you leave.

Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Make contact with aliens. Have the aliens mine the asteroids and give it to you. Drop asteroids on Earth if they have a problem, there`s billions of planets in the Universe. One more or less...

Who cares if its legal?

[nurb432]

If you have the technology to go mine an asteroid, i dont think any country on this planet will be able to take it from you. And if they try, just "accidentally" drop some of what you mined on them.

Re:Who cares if its legal?

[mbone]

If you have the technology to go mine an asteroid, i dont think any country on this planet will be able to take it from you. And if they try, just "accidentally" drop some of what you mined on them.

You may not care, but your investors are highly likely to. That is really what's driving this.

Re:Barriers will fall once the money comes rolling

[Teancum]

I wonder what the lobbying budget of Planetary Resources is at the moment? There are other space mining enterprises, but they are the ones that are furthest along with actual hardware capable of doing something with the idea. Their short-term goal is to simply map the Solar System, and not even trying to pretend that it is for purely scientific purposes.

Wrong, wrong wrong

[mbone]

I was there at the hearing, and I think the summary is pretty far from the true situation.

First, Prof. Gabrynowicz is in the minority in the legal community on this (her response is also to work for international consensus on these issues, which is not going to happen.

Second, the Asteroid Act has been vetted by the State Department (and by a whole bunch of interested parties) and it certainly is in agreement with the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 (even Prof. Gabrynowicz didn't claim otherwise).

Third, all of the space powers appear to be in agreement with the basic principle expressed by the Asteroid Act - that space mining is a lot like deep sea fishing - you can't claim your fishing hole, but you get to keep what you take.

For a more balanced explanation as to why the Act is needed as a US instantiation of the '67 Outer Space Treaty to clarify the rules for US Corporations, see Dean Larson's WSJ Op Ed (or my own take on it).

Re:Wrong, wrong wrong

[Tablizer]

to clarify the rules for US Corporations

Mitt: "Corporations are astronauts, too"

thus if i get to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

ITS ALL MINE BITCHES

That won't end well.

[Jartan]

Personally I would avoid robbing people who have kinetic weapons of mass destruction hanging in orbit. That's just me though.

Asteroid value

[Anonymous Coward]

I recently read an article that appraised the value of investing in asteroid mining.

Minimal. Shit's all rock, nothing of real value, based on any space based venture. If you want a lot of carbon and iron, then it might be good, but the mineral value of Asteroids is pretty minimal.

Re:Asteroid value

[AJWM]

An article. Wow.

Try reading up on the parent bodies of meteorites -- we know of quite a few -- then look at the composition, particularly of e.g. siderites. (Sure, plenty of stony meteorites too, still typically ~20% iron/nickel.)

Not that much carbon, actually. Lots of iron and nickel, and significant amounts of e.g. platinum group metals (same columns in the periodic table as iron and nickel). Fortunately there is some carbon, because it turns out that one of the easiest ways to separate out the different metallic elements is through selective fractional carbonyl precipitation. (React the metal mass with carbon monoxide, heat the resulting gas to the specific temperature at which the specific metal carbonyl breaks down, then collect the pure precipitated metal and recycle the CO.) You definitely want to do this in space, metal carbonyls are pretty toxic.

Re:Asteroid value

[Anonymous Coward]

There are easier ways in space that don't require gravity...

All of the methods you list require gravity to separate the gas from the metal...

It would be easier to use mass spectrometry. It does require a good bit of energy - which is freely available. But it also works VERY well in a vacuum and without gravity.

That is a misreading of the Supremacy Clause:

[Ungrounded Lightning]

You are bound by the treaties your country signed.

Yes: You, and the states, and their courts, are bound by them (to the extent they are clear or were implemented by federal enabling legislation).

In fact, they have more legal weight in the US than laws passed by your own Congress.

NO! They have EXACTLY the same weight as federal law. Both treaties and federal law are trumped by the Constitution, and both are also creatures of Congress, They can be modulated, and destroyed (at least in how they are effective within the country) by congressional action.

The idea that they're any stronger or more permanent than federal legislation comes from a (very common) misreading of the Supremacy Clause:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

This says that the Constitution, Federal Law, and Treaties trump state law in state and federal courts. It says nothing about the relative power among the three.

The misreading is to interpret "all treaties made ... shall be the supreme law of the land ..." to mean that treaties effectively amend the constitution. This is wrong. You can see it by noticing the same kind of misreading also makes federal law equivalent to a constitutional amendment - which it clearly is not.

In fact the Supreme Court has spoken on the relation between the Constitution and treaties: In Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), the Supreme Court held stated that the U.S. Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the U.S. Senate.

Treaties are abrogated, at the federal level, all the time, and there are a number of mechanisms for doing so.

Re:That is a misreading of the Supremacy Clause:

[Anonymous Coward]

It would have been surprising if the US would have implemented treaties differently from every other country.

Re:That is a misreading of the Supremacy Clause:

[Ungrounded Lightning]

It would have been surprising if the US would have implemented treaties differently from every other country.

Why?

It does a LOT of things differently from other countries. It redefined "republic", just for starters.

Re:That is a misreading of the Supremacy Clause:

[Anonymous Coward]

Most somewhat functional countries do work by the rule of law and are sovereign, meaning in this case that a law, a modification of a law or a reference in the law is often required to implement a treaty, and that the legislative process is verifying the constitutionality of the implementation or denying it if necessary.

here is hoping

[Anonymous Coward]

No owner ship granted to space resources. It could be the first place that cannot be owned as the planet, offered on a first come first serve basis while no mandate to give to other people from the resources exists. Space should be a capitolism free zone.. Let it be free for all people to utilize. And maybe state/in managed not for profit.

www.obamasweapon.com

Re:here is hoping

[Anonymous Coward]

UN* United Nations.

Profit on crap from space is unfair because its unlimited and only the wealthy can profit from it, giving themselves unlimited power and riches from something that was free and previously had no worth. This let's them basically make themselves kings , further separating themselves from poor and middle class, no one will ever be able to beat them as long as power and status is tied to money that is obtained in this fashion.

If it's not listed as illegal then...

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

Well, if it's not specifically "illegal"...I say whomever can make it up there should go for it. As long as the companies / countries aren't putting anyone (besides their own astronauts) in danger and aren't "militarizing space" then who cares?

Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

it does...and i live in Mississippi LOL

What would Malcom Reynolds do?

[d'baba]

Hmmmm?

It is obvious isn't it?

[paulkoan]

Surely if a corporation wants to mine (and profit from) resources in outer space, which are owned by every one, they simply need to apply for a licence from a central body.

It should be fairly straightforward to negotiate a licence that makes it worthwhile for the mining corporation that also reflects ownership. So either a proportion of the resources or profits derived from those resources (via a tax) would be distributed to the treaty signers.

Re:It is obvious isn't it?

[ihtoit]

ok, who would you suggest issues this licence? What penalties for operating without one? Who polices it?

The Outer Space Treaty stands pretty well on its own: exploit all you like, keep what you take, but you don't get to picket a chunk of the Moon and say it's yours. Sovereign claims take it from private individual claim status to that of a State Party, no matter how emergent, which is enough to lock you down in the terms of the OST. Even if you didn't sign the treaty, you'll piss other States off enough they'll likely completely ostracise you, which will break you even if you return with an asteroid's worth of brilliant cut diamonds.

Fact Finding Mission

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we should send these lawyers into deep space on a fact finding mission.

FUD

[globaljustin]

No one has to worry about China claiming asteroids.

It really is about being there...it's so ridiculously expansive in all senses of the word...space I mean...

as far as asteroids go, a more likely yet still far flung scenario is China partners with some ridiculous Brittish 'tech innovator' guy (who is backed by oligarch money) to mine an asteroid

they bring an asteroid to earth, screw up and it hits us and destroys civilization

that's more likely than anything China related threatening the US

All Humans Should Read This One

[Anonymous Coward]

Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

What about the Earth..? Explains it all.

America doesn't own space.

[thetoadwarrior]

No one has to pay any attention to US law in space because the US is on earth and not space. The US should focus on things it knows like killing brown people and torture.

Re:America doesn't own space.

[Anonymous Coward]

All this act does is say that America recognizes that if you mine something in space, you own it. You can't claim an asteroid as yours, but whatever you take from it is yours. Similarly, if some other country decides you can claim asteroids, America won't recognize that claim.

Of course, there IS a simple solution.

[Anonymous Coward]

Move to space.

Mine the asteroid.

And use the material in space...

If there is a law that objects, tell them to "come and get me".

The outer space treaty of 1967 is garbage anyway.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why go out of your way to ban using nukes in space??? ITS THE ONE PLACE THAT THEYRE SAFE TO USE!!!

The rules for this already exist

[duck_rifted]

Spaceships are boats, and mined resources are therefore maritime salvage. Problem solved.

who wrote this?

[ihtoit]

The Outer Space Treaty refers to STATE PARTIES, it does NOT refer to private entities nor to commercial exploitation of resources found and extracted in outer space by commercial entities.

This entire article is a waste of time except to invalidate itself by the simple act of linking to the treaty it's bemoaning.

It needs to be ILleagle

[gelfling]

Because you never know what endangered life form you might find.

Re:Barriers will fall once the money comes rolling

[DanielRavenNest]

It's not Planetary Resources itself that has the influence, it is their list of advisers and investors. They include:

James Cameron (movie maker), Eric Schmidt & Larry Page (Google), Charles Simonyi (Microsoft Office, billionaire), Ross Perot Jr. (billionaire), and Richard Branson (Virgin Group).

So I can mine it off you before you land?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is to stop me just taking it off miners as they enter orbit, before they land and enter the jurisdiction of a country?

Keeping in mind that these operations will be unmanned, automated, systems so telling the difference between a failure and a deliberate intercept may be difficult.

e.g. A stealthy craft using a rail gun blasts off the control and communications part of the vehicle, as if it were just a space junk or meteor strike, then another stealthy vehicle moves in and collects the payload.

How are you going to prove that 1000kg of platinum is yours and that I did not get it from some other asteroid myself?