Slashdot Mirror
Canadian, UK Law Professors Condemn Space Mining Provisions of Commercial Space Act (examiner.com)
MarkWhittington writes: The Commercial Space Launch Act, which includes provisions allowing American companies the right to keep resources that they mine in space, was recently signed into law by President Barack Obama. While the act has been hailed as groundbreaking in the United States, the space mining title has gotten an angry reaction overseas. In an article in Science Alert, Gbenga Oduntan, Senior Lecturer in International Commercial Law, University of Kent, condemned the space mining provisions as environmentally risky and a violation of international law. Ram Jakhu, a professor at Canada's McGill University's Institute of air and space law, adds that space mining is a violation of the Outer Space Treaty and should not be allowed.
You are all red shirt cows. Cows say Mooo! Mooo! Mooo! Mooo cows Mooo! Mooo say the Cows. YOU TREKKIE COWS!!!
Environmental wackos have done enough to restrain economic growth here on earth. But in space too? These people are a menace.
an ill wind that blows no good
Any treaty that is unenforceable isn't worth a damn. If the US, China, Russia or anyone else wants to go mine an asteroid, there's precious little anyone else can do about it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It prohibits the militarization and/or colonization of space. It says fuckall about what to do with any stuff we collect there. What a disingenuous asshole.
The idea that the USA - or any other nation state alone, for what its worth - could have the power to grant anyone property rights of extraterrestrial bodies is ridiculous anyway.
"Meanwhile, the Moon Agreement (1979) has in effect forbidden states to conduct commercial mining on planets and asteroids until there is an international regime for such exploitation. While the US has refused to sign up to this, it is binding as customary international law"
This guy is a specialist in international law? You didn't sign up for a treaty, but it's still binding? Sure we'll see how that goes.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Let's assume for a moment that someone is hell bent on space mining and that it is an entirely legal free-for-all. When at the absolute earliest would anyone be able to actually do it? When would anyone be able to return a single kilogram of anything form any space body?
I'm going to suggest that it's over ten years away form any hope of "space mining" yet these idiots are getting paid to pass laws and argue over this shit? How about we not worry about the legality of such matters until it is an actual possibility.
I wonder if anyone would pay me to argue the legality of teleporting into hot chicks' bedrooms? There's presently no law against it and it seems like a matter that people would be passionate about. Could I have a six or seven digit salary to contemplate and argue laws regulating teleportation into the bedrooms of hot chicks.
Space mining would not be economically viable if asteroids were made of pure diamond, which you'll note that they are not.
Until there is some radical shift in the cost to get mass into and back from space - and it needs many orders of magnitude - there is no economic case for space mining. It is conceivable that nuclear propulsion or some other semi-exotic launch tech could do it, but those are not on the horizon.
And at that point, why should the resources NOT go to the parties who can obtain them? When some tribe was miffed that NASA landed a probe on "their" asteroid, NASA said, "Welp, you are welcome to go up there and remove it."
You might as well make a law about what angels dancing on a pin are allowed to wear. "Mining" in space is such an absurd proposition, it will never happen. Look at the price of minerals right here on Earth right now, they're so low they're dragging the economy of places like Alberta down.
Technology always gets better, remember? These kinds of grandiose 1960s space fantasies are obsolete. We don't need to "get" more stuff from space, we'll simply recycle and reuse and reduce what we need here.
The Mighty Green and Red lasers.
They already have a friend building them the Big Red Rocket to take them into space to mine gold in the asteroid belt.
That would mean that anyone that mines anything anywhere has no right to it? Earth or space. What's the difference? Used to be any country that landed on a newly discovered land claimed it as their own. Why would space be any different?
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
The US is an Oligarchy who's 'elected' representatives only serve their corporate masters. Any code, law or treaty contrary to a large corporations desires will be dispatched and buried with litigation in the name of profit.
As far as other celestial body travel, the only way got a chance is to make it commercially viable. Take the moon for example; OK we went there 40 years ago, so what? there it sits - no further exportation or examination. On the other hand if there were valuable minerals for harvest, a corporation would be there as soon as ROI provided.
What a bunch of Liberal, know nothing ninnies. Environmentally risky? What environment? Space? You mean the vacuum filled with deadly radiation? How exactly do you hurt that?
MORONS!!! Who let these guys have a doctorate?
This "Space Treaty" restricting mining is a complete joke and an attempt by the world's bureaucrats to hamstring civilization into a highly pointless "approval" process fraught with do nothing committees making the entire process needlessly expensive. The first country that figures out how to cheaply get a payload in and out of the atmosphere will become the next thousand year empire with all others bowing to its feet. Dare I say it a galactic empire beyond our wildest imaginations.
Whether it's Russia, China, USA, or Sealand is a moot point. The potential riches are unfathomable out in space once the small problem of propulsion is well figured out!
They're just jealous that they can't exploit space for the enrichment of a few funded by taxpayers.
And their opinions are worthless.
End of story.
There are two distinct issues here. First, the common law says that if a person harvests a wild animal, plant, or other thing, it is his to eat or otherwise use. That's about ownership of an object.
A different, though related concept, is that the first -country- to start using some territory has a claim of sovereignty over that territory. Meaning essentially that the area becomes part of that country.
The treaty says that -sovereignty- rules are different in space, no country can claim the moon or another planet as part of their country, by colonizing it. The treaty's Article 2 reads, "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."
The treaty says that Mars wouldn't become part of the the USA if the US colonized it. It does NOT say that you can't go to Mars, pick up a rock, bring it home, and then own that rock. That's ownership of an object, not sovereignty over territory, and the treaty doesn't prohibit ownership of an object.
Mining Ceres pollutes the oceans there and makes the land bad for the little green Ceres boys and girls.
It is had not to agree with Ricky Lee of Australia, who wrote his thesis on the subject:
Quite.
I went to the House hearing for this Bill, and also talked to various staffers and actual space lawyers (as opposed to professors) about it. I feel, and they seem to feel, that the 2015 Space Act is entirely consistent both with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which says
and also with the precedent set by the US, Russia and Japan, all of which have material returned from celestial bodies. The reality is that these three countries have all treated those materials as property, which can be and has been traded. That is the actual customary international law here, not the Moon Treaty, which has been ratified by no major space-faring nation, and which is a dead letter. In addition, each state gets to set the laws on actions by their citizens in space, and are responsible for those actions (say, if they cause damage to another country's spacecraft).
Finally, the 2015 Space Act itself says
So, despite most of the headlines announcing this law, it doesn't (and couldn't) allow for the ownership of asteroids, just of material extracted from asteroids, exactly as is allowed for in the Outer Space Treaty.
I have to say that the space lawyers I have talked to share my puzzlement as to what the professors say things that seem so ungrounded. (They are of course welcome to disagree or oppose, but you would expect that they would have arguments grounded in facts.)
Note, also, that none of the other space powers has complained about this act, which they were and are certainly able to do it they feel it violates the '67 Outer Space Treaty.
I don't think the world has anything to worry about. The US has become a third world country space wise, we are barely able to get a resupply capsule to the ISS. Space is expensive and most US corporations are too short sighted to spend the money necessary for R&D, they are looking to NASA (which is being strangled by government budget cuts and incompetent management) to develop the tech for them. By the time US corporations get around to figuring out this whole space mining thing the Russians and Chinese will already be there.
All your space rocks are belong to us.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I don't get what all of the fuss is about...
It'll probably take a million years for us to suck our solar system dry if not longer and by then we'll have colonized many other solar systems.
http://www.state.gov/t/isn/5181.htm
"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."
You agreed not to appropriate it, it's not yours to give away.
As to whether its a treaty that can be enforced, of course it can, even in US courts it can be enforced.
As to whethe these 'mine and asteroid' space company scams are legal, no, they're stock market frauds, there is no intention to mine asteroids by these companies, they want a veneer of plausibility for their stock scam.
It is to the benefit of all mankind for the supply of these rare resources to become less constrained on the supply side, thus driving the prices down. Imagine rare-"earth" minerals mined by the cubic meter from off-world bodies, vastly increasing the supply for land-side electronics while simultaneously driving their prices down and moving the environmental impact somewhere with essentially no environment, and thus no impact.
Sovereignty in the real world is based upon a nations ability to defend its territory. Any treaty is only as binding as it's acceptance by sovereign nations. No one has broken the Outer Space Treaty because up until now no one has had the technological ability to break the Outer Space Treaty, nor any overriding economic incentive to do so. Once it becomes technologically possible to make money by claiming sovereignty over part of another planet, and someone has the ability to enforce that sovereignty then they will break the Outer Space Treaty.
If the USA is deciding who has access to it (eg USA courts deciding it) that is a defacto sovereignty claim.
If one country is free to pass a law assigning ownership of things in space then every other country is also free to do so. These would probably conflict.
Space Treaty says in part: ... "Such exploration and use shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries ..."
Communist: Individuals mean nothing and only governments decide allocation of resources. Space has limitless resources, hence it must not be touched - it would erode the power of governments.
Capitalist: exploration and use will create limitless resources, benefiting all mankind in a free market economy by reducing costs, pollution and poverty.
Personal Opinion: Making the whole universe off-limits to individual use is a long term impossibility unless every individual is enslaved.
Are these people anti-progress or what ?! don't they want more resources to help the poor and lift the Third World out of poverty? doesn't sound like it - all because they don't want to "pollute" space. Ijits !
Really, Slashdot, isn't there a better way to do this?
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
No one has broken the Outer Space Treaty because up until now no one has had the technological ability to break the Outer Space Treaty
Yes they have. It would be feasible to have nuclear armed satellites.
and someone has the ability to enforce that sovereignty then they will break the Outer Space Treaty.
Only if they are immoral.
Also there is the issue of MAD.
The criticism is justified. We can't let a few powerful entities control the spice.
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
scrap metal from outer space :-)
It does NOT say that you can't go to Mars, pick up a rock, bring it home, and then own that rock.
Before this law I don't know of any law that would grant you ownership of that rock.
These countries are just upset because they don't have a space program that their own mining interests could use or build on their own to go do mining.
They are going to be locked out of this market. They have rocket envy. Maybe Canada Pharma can work on making space Viagra for when you don't have a rocket.
Anyway the OTHER reason these countries don't like this is that they all have big mining interests. Finding a cheap way to mine in space and get those resources back to the Earth would devastate the value of minerals mined on the Earth. Who the hell will need De Boers if space diamonds are found in abundance? A diamond FROM SPACE might even be worth a lot, but not to De Boers.
This brings to mind that a LOT of Earth companies would be happy in these space mining efforts blew up on the launch pad or failed in space. Those who go to do this space mining are going to have to watch their backs all the time. There is far too much money in the hands of companies on the ground who would be happy if a loose bolt or something caused a failure. Probably no proof, no way to trace it.
Sig for hire.
There was a time when conquests could only be made if you landed on at least a tiny beach, regardless of the size of the landmass, and if anyone's already living there. Now, those grasping for ultimate control, especially so no one can be free if they escape their regimes on earth, claim what they've never touched, might not even have ever seen, and have no plans to ever visit and plant the flag on. A transparent attempt to ensure that only government can own anything at the end of the day, not individuals.
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
It is called the Rule of Capture in English, and has been recognized common law in British empire for hundreds of years. The first known written statute stating the principle was from Sparta, over a thousand years ago.
An interesting and well-known case on the application of Rule of Capture in America is Pierson v. Post.
An artifact or structure is buried in an asteroid. Keep it secret, mine it, melt it down, ship it back in crates labelled 'inertial ballast'?
Ditto for the Gribbles found crawling, oozing, or whooshing around - since they are "obviously not sentient"?
And the care taken to avoid any dangerous orbital 'pinball' scatter or changes due to mass loss is certain to be just as great as that taken historically to avoid any harm to the nealth and well-being of local communities surrounding their activities here on Earth.
The power to say "sure, go out there, grab anything you want, it's yours" unilaterally, regarding a common resource is really very curious, questionable, arrogant.
Then the Chinese set up a US front corporation (a "person") to go out and mine and deliver it ... anywhere, including there. Space Enron?
It doesn't even have a physics department anymore. Sad to go back to where I spent so many years of my life and find it replaced by an architecture department. I think they abdicated their claim to have a say.
It always amazes me that ruling junta in Washington seems to think it has some special place in the world. Most Europeans are quite repulsed by the militaristic corporate totalitarianism that is practiced by the American regime, and the endemic corruption of those who run and serve the regime. America is now a shining example to the rest of the world of what not to become.
Surely as the only international space treaties the US has signed largely prohibit creating territories in space or weaponising the same the recent "Space Mining Provisions of Commercial Space Act" is bunkum as you can't have jurisdiction without territorial rights and it is therefore in contravention of pre-signed treaties.
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
The concern over this is bizzare. The way these people talk as if you can only use an asteroid for scientific means is insane. These people are worried about mining some lifeless rock when we are turning areas of the earths surface into moonscapes for mining? If we have a way that we can alleviate the strain on limited terrestrial resources, and reduce the impacts of mining on terrestrial ecosystems on earth, I think we should go for it. The idea that private companies should not be allowed to invest and be able to recoup their investment and make a profit by making their product available on the open market to benefit consumers is nuts. Here we have a way to mine a lifeless body in space instead of mine some rainforest on earth, if someone can figure out how to do this, kudos, if its a private company, thats great, everyone will benefit. Private investment helps fund these kinds of things without need for as much taxpayer confiscation.
Forget grabbing land. What you need in space is a way to provide oxygen and water to support human life. Can you "claim" anything in space with a probe/drone?
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
We're not at that level of tech yet, and frankly, the ONLY reason I would mine an asteroid in space would be to use the minerals in space. Shipping them down the gravity well to earth would be absolutely insane. Frankly the best way to do that is just launch the entire asteroid at earth, maybe by say creating a nice asteroid landing zone out of a very large piece of land. You could easily section off vast areas of Canada, Russia, China, or even Africa which are nearly desolate, and use those areas to 'land' your asteroid and then mine it.
But if the asteroid is in space, then processing and using the minerals in space is by FAR the better approach.
Now, when we get to the point of playing Space Engineers IRL, let me know.
These rocket phallic symbols interest me. Since boner pills are a sure-fire way to make money, I suspect they will make one much richer than space mining ever will.
Please go on...
Hate to remind you guys, but space is outside of the Jurisdiction of the US Government. It can only make laws that apply to US Citizens up there. A treaty is a solemn and formal agreement between countries. It does not have to be enforced by military power. It can be broken, but a signatory country that does that becomes a rogue and a pariah that cannot be trusted in any contract or agreement. The USA is not quite that bad: yet.
Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
What about the Larkin Decision?
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
Just look what happened to the Klingon Empire!