Slashdot Mirror
Making Mining the Asteroids and the Moon Legal
MarkWhittington writes: Popular Science reported on a bill called the Space Act of 2015 that has passed the House and may soon pass the Senate that will allow private companies to own the natural resources that they mine in space. The idea would seem to be a no-brainer. However, the bill is causing some heartburn among some space law experts, especially in other countries. Fabio Tronchetti, a lawyer at the Harbin Institute of Technology in China, argues that the law would violate the Outer Space Treaty.
Any company with the capacity to profitably mine the moon, or asteroids, isn't going to give a shit about the quaint laws of an individual nation state.
It looks like the US got bored forcing their laws on other countries here on Earth so they've moved on to the moon and asteroids. First it was refusing to honour EU data protection laws agreed to by international treaty, now it's ignoring the Outer Space Treaty. This is establishing sovereignty on the moon and asteroids by granting businesses permission to operate there and take resources from them. If it wasn't establishing sovereignty, those laws would have no effect, nor would they be necessary. As a European citizen, I really want the US to fuck off.
Everything in space is ours. What are you going to do about it?
The moon affects everyone on the planet. It influences tides, which are vital to the ecosystem of the entire planet, and shouldn't be messed with.
That they didn't come up with this law first, they still might.
So make the EU outlaw asteroid mining... and give it the resources to police space. Good luck.
By the way, this is inevitable in the long run. Either we will die out or we will start to exploit resources in space. Earth is becoming too small for us fast. Space should be big enough for quite a while...
You can't assign rights you don't have. If that mineral isn't owned by USA how can it decide that it transfers ownership to a corporation?
Your example of the US forcing its laws on other countries is the US refusing to follow EU law... uh, isn't that the EU trying to force its law on the US???
Really, claiming territory that you cannot even get to? Any treaties or laws regarding anything beyond geosynchronous orbit are laughable, because they are unenforceable.
Heck, even here on earth, I wish people would follow a simple principle: deliberately flout stupid laws and regulations. It's the only way to get them off the books. Of course, you have to be willing to fight an enforcement attempt, and most of us would rather not. However, the alternative is for regulations to accumulate. Every time a bureaucrat has a brain fart, they add another one, and the damned things never go away.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Nope, it's the EU requiring companies to comply with its laws when they exert their activities in the EU.
There's nothing like $HOME
as if the US has anything to say about mining the moon or an astroid..
If I want to mine the moon/astroid, there is nothing that the US can do about it..
They aren't granting any sovereignty, rather they are just letting them keep/sell what they dig up or otherwise obtain, but they still have no ownership of the celestial body. Kind of like prospecting on federal land. You don't own the land, but you get to keep the valuable minerals you pull out of it.
Whether people like it or not, if you can't obtain resources out there, they won't go there. If you've got a profit motive, you won't mine something you can't use or sell. And if you're doing exploration, you will want to use as much from out there as is feasible so you don't have to ship it all from Earth, even if that's possible.
I think it's perfectly clear that the only treaties that exist anywhere in the world are the ones that say the USA can force its will and laws on every other country. Even when they don't negotiate in secret behind closed doors the sale of other countries laws to corporations they still try and apply local laws in other countries (see Microsoft's court case, the Pirate Bay debacle, etc).
Why should mining the moon be any different?
The company should only be allowed to own what it extracts, not what exists. Exclusivity over natural resources should not be allowed, on the moon, or on earth. That way you can own all the land you work until you bump into somebody else.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
"Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person."
( Article 11, paragraph 3 ).
On "other celestial bodies" however, e.g. asteroids, the Treaty is silent regarding property and appropriation.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Empires rise and fall. America is on the wane. China is on the rise. America has just handed the moon on a platter. Well done. Derp Derp.
The moon and asteroids do not belong to the U.S.A, why would the U.S.A. be legitimate to authorize this ?
Go to zero. Belgium. Brussels. Order fries. While there, slip in a, "Oh, can I mine those rocks in space?". If the guy says "Yes!" and hands you the fries, you can do it!
A bill to allow mining does not do jack shit if it is in disagreement with the outer space treaty, which the US has signed and thus as a treaty is binding and US law too. What the US can do is withdraw from the treaty first. But the way i see it, launcher capacity is right now not in the US. Therefore if they do it too early, the leg up will be for the Russian, EU and chinese *if they wish to*, because those are the one with commercial launcher capacity *right now*.
That's like saying that mining on Earth shouldn't be allowed, because we all count on its gravity.
Get rid of it. It's shit.
But seriously, it was put together in a time where everyone was clueless.
Everyone is still clueless, but we know at least a little bit more now, enough to know this stupid treaty is only going to slow things down and annoy people.
The story says:
"In May, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would give asteroid mining companies property rights to the minerals they extract from space. "
Clearly it assigns property rights to property that isn't the USAs!
In reality the US isn't trying to force anything, while the EU is trying to force foreign companies to solely follow EU rules for activities conducted within the EU.
The problem is, EU law does not exempt foreign companies from their domestic jurisdictions, so their home countries can still require them to follow their laws - which can bring them into conflict with the EU.
Unless an agreement is signed between the countries, its up to the companies to resolve the conflict between the two jurisdictions they are simultaneously operating in. They can't simply ignore one jurisdiction because the other jurisdiction says they have to.
The problem is, if there is no ownership over the celestial body, there is nothing stopping a third party from stepping in once the hard work of prospecting and removing the overburden has been accomplished and doing the easy mining - after all the original mining company doesn't own the land so they can't stop someone else mining it at the same time as them.
Just use homesteading theory. If you set up a mining operation on a body you have the best claim to those resources that are within your capability. Look how mining claims were staked out during the gold rush. The first person couldn't claim all of California or Alaska but they could stake out what they could realistically process. There was plenty of conflicts but they managed to work it out relatively well. If someone finds a small asteroid a couple meters across one company might be able to process it. But something hundreds of meters across could have several miners with little problem.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
If your willing to mine the Moon for whatever its useful material it has and transport it back to Earth. Or use it to develop infrastructure on the Moon. Well then, you go right ahead and mine the shit out of those places. Good luck to you, and whoever is dumb enough to buy into your scheme.
Lol space nutters.
We may stabilise our population a bit, but we won't all die out, and we're not going to Star Trek across the universe either.
Why police space? Just wait for anyone to come back down to Earth and refuse to protect their property claim, since it is not recognised.
An agreement has been signed. The USA refuse to be serious about enforcing it.
There's nothing like $HOME
Yes, as the parent said: the US are trying to enforce their laws on other countries.
Your argumentation is completely wrong. An EU company is not required to follow any special EU laws for its operations in the US, only US laws apply (except for accounting and other stuff, which are usually fixed via ownership constructions where one company owns another one). However the USA tries to force american companies that operate in the EU to follow not only EU law, which is a no brainer, but also US law, which is idiotic.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Your argumentation is completely wrong. An EU company is not required to follow any special EU laws for its operations in the US, only US laws apply (except for accounting and other stuff, which are usually fixed via ownership constructions where one company owns another one).
Uh, completely and utterly wrong - EU companies are still required to follow EU law when operating in other countries.
Take for example bribery and financial conduct laws - what may be legal in the foreign jurisdiction isn't necessarily legal in their home countries jurisdiction, and there have been examples of EU companies being investigated and prosecuted within the EU for their actions in non-EU countries.
However the USA tries to force american companies that operate in the EU to follow not only EU law, which is a no brainer, but also US law, which is idiotic.
If they dont want to follow the law of the country that they are incorporated in, they can move their HQ elsewhere in the world. Simple as that.
It looks like the US got bored forcing their laws on other countries here on Earth so they've moved on to the moon and asteroids. First it was refusing to honour EU data protection laws agreed to by international treaty, now it's ignoring the Outer Space Treaty. This is establishing sovereignty on the moon and asteroids by granting businesses permission to operate there and take resources from them. If it wasn't establishing sovereignty, those laws would have no effect, nor would they be necessary. As a European citizen, I really want the US to fuck off.
Does planting the flag first on a territory not claim that territory?
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
"Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person."
( Article 11, paragraph 3 ).
On "other celestial bodies" however, e.g. asteroids, the Treaty is silent regarding property and appropriation.
The US'll just 'unsign' it like it did the Kyoto treaty.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
natural resources in place
Once I remove the resource from its place, then its mine :)
Article II
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty_of_1967
If you don't own it, you can't give it away, even if its just the 2% of it that are worthwhile minerals.
Why police space? Just wait for anyone to come back down to Earth and refuse to protect their property claim, since it is not recognised.
How much arguing do you want to do with people with friends in space who are destitute and hopeless if you tell them they can't keep their rocks... and by the way, they're in space, and they have rocks?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Just don't come whining when someone parks his mining equipment on some skyscrapers in New York, killing a couple of thousand, and starts drilling, ok?
It seems likely that at some point whatever laws and treaties nations establish regarding off-world matters would come into conflict with the realities of living and working off-world. Probably around the time off-worlders realize Earth-bound authorities don't actually have any power over them.
Make it as legal as you want, it's still never going to happen.
Hold on a second, I just checked the outer space treaty was signed in 1967. The moon landings where from 1969 - 1972, so according to the treaty the US signed the moon rocks which they brought back from the moon landings which are part of the moon do not belong to anyone not the USA or NASA so when they run around the world chasing missing moon rocks and prosecuting people who sell them they are violating that treaty right? How can they claim ownership and still adhere to this treaty?
That's like saying that mining on Earth shouldn't be allowed, because we all count on its gravity.
Don't laugh about this, these things are just not funny anymore.
Yes this could be turned into an environmental issue just like global average temperature. Asteroid mining brings mass to Earth and changes mass ratio of Earth to other bodies. Never mind accretion due to meteors or atmosphere lost to the solar wind... this study only concerns anthropogenic effects. A tie to sea level would be found. You'd have NASANOAA jointly announcing that "2025 was the heaviest year on record" by a whopping 1.1 x 10^-35 or something and despite the infinitesimal value within the error bars it would make big People Bad You Should Be Ashamed headlines
The inertia space travel imparts on Earth would be tied to the survival of some little snail species somewhere, a loathsome little snail, whose survival is hanging by a thread. Fuck the snail it's dying anyway but its misfortune would need to be offset by slap on the wrist economic indulgences and actual mitigation efforts like the cost of launching an equivalent mass of lawyers into space from the antipode when shipments arrive.
As I said, these jokes are not funny anymore because people out there are really thinking like this,
You are joking, aren't you...?
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
Hows is it even illegal if no country can claim ownership of moon or asteroid? As far as i know its like this, unless it sits in your ship/base, its not yours yet...
Heck, you may be right, though only in the case they chase the rock as their "property". If the excuse is "we need those rocks for scientific research / lab examination" then they adhere to, at least, the letter of the Treaty. (Whether or not they adhere to the Treaty's **spirit** is something that could only be assessed by the UN itself. But then again, IANAL.)
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Here is an article that was linked on slashdot http://www.collectspace.com/ne... and at the bottom it says "Outside of lunar meteorites and a few ounces of the moon returned by Soviet robotic probes, all other moon rocks are considered the property of the United States. As such, according to the NASA Office of the Inspector General, those found in possession of samples can be prosecuted for theft of government property, for which there is no statute of limitations." which is in violation of the Outer space treaty wonder if they know lol
If all of space is considered international zone, the laws of maritime commerce in international waters may become the default law. The expense of getting there will pale in comparison to mining it. Those that mine it will be very reliant on any shipment for several years to recoup a portion of the expense. Any nation feeling left out due to a "mining claim" could resort to piracy to gain these precious resources. Then it is all about whose flag is being flown for whom protection the ship is under. Knowing humans seem to repeat past mistakes, I kinda expect a transition period with some "independent" piracy.
Then I give you an other example (happened in RL):
a US school class of kids between 16 and 18 visit Paris, France. The teacher allows them to share a bottle of wine (means, less than an ounce per student).
That is completely legal.
However US courts claim that US law is to held up "in Europe!" which makes the teacher lose his job.
We europeans lough our asses off about such stupidity.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
LOL you seem to be right. One does indeed wonder if they do know at all. Some official saying this may, however, not yet be a clear and final violation of the Treaty itself. At least I think so, as "NASA Office of the Inspector General" does not fully equal "US Government" or "US State", being rather an government-run institution. If NASA were challenged to hand over moon rocks to any, say, research institute and then refused to do so by claiming "they're government property" and were backed by Congress or Senate, then, hell yes.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
The amount that we'd bring back to Earth would be insignificant. The global shipping weight is about 1.4 * 10^6 kg (Source). The weight of the Earth is 5.972 * 10^24 kg. If we assumed that we brought the entire global shipping weight from asteroids to Earth annually, it would take 42 billion years before we brought even one millionth of one percent of the Earth's current mass. I think, at that point, we would have bigger problems than simply "we're making the Earth too heavy."
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Wait whos dying here?
Why would you "mine" a skyscraper? How is that like mining an asteroid?
How did you come up with such a horrible analogy? Why?
Do you have a source? Your story while intriguing is short and lacks context. What jurisdiction pressed charges? Was this just the school firing the teacher? Was this caused by a busy body parent? (Magic 8-ball says yes) Etc.
It forbids Earthly nations from extending their sovereignty out into space. It does not forbid private entities from exploring and exploiting asteroids and other resources, and it does not prevent them from establishing their own sovereignty by custom of usage as this process develops.
As much as any other terrorist.
http://nypost.com/2013/01/09/judge-upholds-firing-of-teacher-who-let-students-drink-wine-during-trip-to-france/
That is completely legal.
However US courts claim that US law is to held up "in Europe!" which makes the teacher lose his job.
We europeans lough our asses off about such stupidity.
I would laugh with you, if that's what actually happened. Except it's not (unless you can provide a contrary link). What actually happens (on multiple occassions, apparently) is that the teacher was fired for violating school rules. Not for violating US law (because in fact a teenager drinking wine in Paris is not a violation of US law.). The teacher was responsible for following the schools rules, the teacher failed to do so, and the teacher was fired/punished for doing so. The only involvement of the courts (AFAICT) is that they agreed the school could fire the teacher.
Now, of course "zero tolerance" rules are incredibly stupid, but that's more of a low-level institutional problem than a US law problem. Note that there actually are a couple of US laws that apply to US citizens even outside the country: for example, laws against pedophilia (to prevent sex tourists from going abroad and having sex with 12-year-olds or younger). Drinking abroad, however, is not against US law.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
As much as any other terrorist.
Oh, you mean you plan to lie to the people about it and milk it for as much money as possible?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The treaty is clear, and I imagine that most of us agree with the spirit of the treaty, but the treaty goes too far. It effectively bans any permanent settlement on the moon. If that ever becomes practical, this treaty will be mincemeat. We should make a better treaty now before the current one gets dumped -- possibly without a replacement.
you do realize the Kyoto treaty was never ratified by the US Senate (in fact, the Clinton administration never submitted it), right?
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
Now tell this to people living in the middle east...
The reason for the 70 years of peace in first world countries is that wars are now fought in other countries.
oh yes they are. the we needz more of your moniez eu is now setting up to levy fines on income from outside of the eu, ALL of the bits outside in fact
Read it more carefully. It says "natural resources in place". In other words, you cannot claim ownership of an iron deposit or gold seam. But you can claim ownership of rocks or natural resources removed (by you) from the surface (or at least it doesn't say you can't).
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
It looks like the US got bored
And it looks like the moon will get bored too.
We europeans lough our asses off about such stupidity.
Really? Try going abroad to have sex with underage children in a country where that is legal.
That sort of thing is prosecuted in the EU, regardless of it being legal in the foreign jurisdiction. Its also prosecuted in the US as well.
... at least 50% of the time to claim ownership, I have no problem with someone owning stuff in space, with the caveat that only past physical presence counts towards the 50%.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The aliens are laughing their asses off over this.
It's all good, except for example I don't give a flying fuck who signed what, I didn't sign it and I am certain people who may be able to mine on the moon eventually would see it the same way (correctly). Fuck those who signed it on behalf of everybody else, nobody should care about it.
You can't handle the truth.
First, governments have no say in the issue. The moon and asteroids do not belong to them so screw the government.
Second, corporations don't own it either, so if I somehow manage to send a bot to the moon they better stay the heck out of the way of other people's bots, or else their own bots may end up damaged.
The US forcing its laws on other countries.
At what point will we have mined the moon to where its mass is reduced and our weather gets totally fucked?
Under its constitution, laws and treaties have equal footing, with the Constitution itself standing above both.
Just as one law can supersede another law, or a new treaty can supersede a past one, a law can have the effect of the US withdrawing from a treaty and a treaty can have the effect of rescinding an existing law.
If other countries don't like it, they are free to implement reprisals, up to and including declaring war on us and, if they have the wherewithal, launching every nuke they have at us (note to any country stupid enough to nuke the United States: You likely won't survive the attempt - and if you have a lot of nukes neither will human civilization).
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Well this is really to stop Oh Boy New World!!!1!!11 idiocy where countries plant a flag and try to claim much or all of the moon.
It really isn't to stop colonies from landing and growing, much less the inevitable declarations of independence, nor people, private or otherwise, from mining.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
No no no, the US is simply following the Moscow-Krimean-East Ukraine principle in this matter. It is now a perfectly established way of interpreting international law.
so america not only owns all the countries on this earth but also space... wtf?!?!?!
Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place
This reads like the USGA's official rules of golf. In golf you are allowed to pick up and move "loose impediments" out of your ball's way, but you are not allowed to move things in place, such as trees or grass.
I think if they had to dig for it, it would fall under the treaty... but if it's a loose rock lying on the surface that anyone can just pick up, it's fair game.
If you write said amateur sci-fi, don't forget to trow in some sharks. Because sharks in space with lasers!
But then it wouldn't be Sci-fi anymore, it would be "SyFy" which you can only experience on the SyFy channel.
Conditions change, people become wiser. Are there any treaties 2000 years old that are still enforced? 1000?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Our Lords have saw fit to have pity upon us and allow us the fruits of our labor in far off unattainable lands. Are they not gracious and wise? Let us bow low and kiss the ground they walk upon in our humility, so unworthy our we of such benevolence.
This is where another principle comes in: "Possession is 9/10 of the law."
If somebody does get to the moon and starts mining it, who--practically speaking--will stop them? It will be the wild west all over again.
What if a space mining company decides to smash two asteroids together to make it easier to get to the creamy center? Where is the law assigning responsibility / liability when asteroid bits start plummeting to Earth and wiping out cities?
Yes, because it is explicitly written in the law.
It is a difference if I make a law and say: "my citizens are prohibited to harm children every where on the world" or if I have a law that says: "minors are under protection and may not be harmed" and later try to use that on a 'crime' committed somewhere not under my jurisdiction.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Still a couple centuries shy of 1000 but...Magna Carta?
In the US, the mineral rights (and other natural resources) are often part of the real estate. Some places have legally segregated such rights from the surface estate, but they are still both considered property rights---which implies ownership.
The Outer Space Treaty says no one can own the Moon or other celestial bodies.
Since the way that the US handles natural resources implies ownership, it is a contradiction. And since treaties are second only to the Constitution in the US, it does seem that mining space is illegal for US-registered spacecraft.
If other countries have different laws, then they may have a loophole. But this is a facet of common law, so other countries will be in a similar conundrum. This treaty is about 50 years old; maybe it's time to revise it.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
As a US citizen, it amuses me when less evolved folks from third world countries (such as yourself) think they matter. Why don't you go pray at your sky wizard and leave the rule making to the grown-ups, mmm-kay?
Which America complied with the laws that eu told us to.
Wait whos dying here?
Why would you "mine" a skyscraper? How is that like mining an asteroid?
How did you come up with such a horrible analogy? Why?
Star Trek Movie reference coming.... WHOOSH... Star Trek movie reference passed...
You need to learn the difference between big objects and small objects. This is like Greenpeace's campaign to destroy the sun because nuclear fusion is evil and the sun is too hot..
Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
Can someone explain please how the USA government has jurisdiction over the moon, or any other "celestial body"? Granting property rights over something implies jurisdiction and/or ownership. Is the moon US property now? When did that happen?
And, with all due respect to the million of intelligent and ethical USA citizens who might read this, do you understand now why the majority of the non-USS population of Earth regards the USA as arrogant and supremely hypocritical? It seems more and more that the underlying moral authority of the USA's actions outside its own borders is simply: might is right. Can this act be interpreted in any other way?
Professional Idiot
you do realize the Kyoto treaty was never ratified by the US Senate (in fact, the Clinton administration never submitted it), right?
I know it wasn't ratified - but it was signed by the US administration.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
So what? A treaty only becomes binding on the U.S. when it's ratified. Before that, it's the operating assumptions of the current administration. In the case of Kyoto. That was DOA in the senate, and the Clinton administration didn't even submit it for ratification.
Yeah, that's the way it should be. Let the wars be fought in shitty places. Move them off the beaches and the fields and into the deserts and polar regions. Let the animal Nazis and Muslims fight amongst themselves until they're all fucking dead! Good riddance to them all!