Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Moon Space

Who Owns the Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers (theconversation.com) 208

Posted by msmash from the uncharted-territory dept.
An anonymous reader shares a report: While the legal status of the Moon as a "global commons" accessible to all countries on peaceful missions did not meet any substantial resistance or challenge, the Outer Space Treaty left further details unsettled. Contrary to the very optimistic assumptions made at the time, so far humankind has not returned to the moon since 1972, making lunar land rights largely theoretical.

That is, until a few years ago when several new plans were hatched to go back to the moon. In addition at least two U.S. companies, Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries, which have serious financial backing, have started targeting asteroids for the purpose of mining their mineral resources. Geek note: Under the aforementioned Outer Space Treaty, the moon and other celestial bodies such as asteroids, legally speaking, belong in the same basket. None of them can become the "territory" of one sovereign state or another.

The very fundamental prohibition under the Outer Space Treaty to acquire new state territory, by planting a flag or by any other means, failed to address the commercial exploitation of natural resources on the moon and other celestial bodies. This is a major debate currently raging in the international community, with no unequivocally accepted solution in sight yet. Roughly, there are two general interpretations possible. Countries such as the United States and Luxembourg (as the gateway to the European Union) agree that the moon and asteroids are "global commons," which means that each country allows its private entrepreneurs, as long as duly licensed and in compliance with other relevant rules of space law, to go out there and extract what they can, to try and make money with it. [...] On the other hand, countries such as Russia and somewhat less explicitly Brazil and Belgium hold that the moon and asteroids belong to humanity as a whole.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Who Owns the Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers More

Who Owns the Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers

Comments Filter:

  • I do (Score:2)

    by nnet ( 20306 )
    I own it.

    • I own it.

      Do you rent it out for parties?

      • Re:I do (Score:4, Insightful)

        by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Friday July 20, 2018 @08:43PM (#56983494)

        Frankly, I dont see how anyone can claim to own it (government or otherwise) which hasn't claimed it. Governments get their power through the citizenry they govern, not through some mystical power bestowed on them. I don't see how Brazil or Belgium have the right what other people do with things that are not Brazil's or Belgium's? The moon certainly isn't, nor are far off asteroids. If you want something, get there and claim it. If someone invades, and wants it for themselves, then you either have to have the means to defend it (which, lets be honest; if you are mining on the moon, you probably have the means to), or establish treaties with those who do.

        The moon is no different than an island, its just the ocean that has changed. In the old days, when new islands were found, they were ruled by the people who found them (think of Hawaii). If you didn't have the means to defend yourselves against someone else who wanted it, you lost that right (again, think of Hawaii).

        I will have a party on the moon, best of luck stopping me.

        • Countries regularly refuse to acknowledge someone's ownership of something, even if it is obvious. For example, many countries don't acknowledge Taiwan as a country separate from China, at least not officially. It's just politics.

          • Which is why Taiwan buys armaments from the US and has treaties for its protection. If they can't protect themselves from Chinese intent of ownership, they are pretty much screwed. Alliances, treaties, and self defense are the solution there. Just like a moon base.

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 20, 2018 @04:18PM (#56982474)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Would you be interested in selling it? I think it would look good next to the bridge I just bought in New York City.

    • "I own it."

      Obviously it's the cheesecake factory owning it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cshark ( 673578 )

      No, the moon is mine, titled to me by my great gran-pappy, and I'll go to space war with anyone who leaves a slashdot comment to the contrary.

  • Finishing the summary.... (Score:5, Informative)

    by apoc.famine ( 621563 ) <apoc.famine@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Friday July 20, 2018 @03:48PM (#56982280) Journal

    The two possible interpretations are that they are global commons and countries can license operators to exploit them, or they belong to humanity as a whole, and we can only exploit them together.

    Both have analogies back on earth, and treaties that cover these mechanisms.

    Would be nice if /. had editors. They might have been able to add this information so the summary didn't just end on an incomplete thought.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • You do realize that if they could do that to a significant extent, it would make the moon habitable, right? I think a lot of people would be 100% for that.

        • Sounds like a conspiracy from the Chinese.

        • I think you mean Mars... it takes an atmosphere to cause global warming, and that's one thing the moon doesn't have. At all. Nada. It doesn't have the gravity to sustain one, it all floats off into space.

          • No. You've missed the point entirely. If someone could cause global warming on the moon, they would need to give it an atmosphere. That would make it far more habitable than it is now.

    • Generally speaking, if you gain continuous control of a previously unclaimed location, that location belongs to you. Planting a flag is not sufficient. Planting a person is, but only for the area over which that person is capable of exerting control.

      Treaty or no treaty, the parts of the moon will go the same way.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by King_TJ ( 85913 )

      Seems to me the correct answer is that they're a "free for all" as far as resource collection goes. If you're able to get there, mine the resources, and bring them back to Earth -- they're your resources to resell.

      They "belong to humanity as a whole", to the extent that any or all of us are able to get there. The trip is still quite risky, costly and technically difficult to make -- so whoever invests all of that towards going there deserves to be able to profit from it on our planet, if they can.

  • If the above statement isn't currently true in the legal sense, then it should be made true. No one individual, legal entity, group of people, company, corporation, conglomerate, or government should ever 'own' Earth's Moon. The reasons for this should not require explanation.

    The above, having been said, and for the sake of argument accepted as fact: I'm perfectly okay with structures on the Moon, and the ground underneath them, being owned by whoever is responsible for them. Similar to how the Embassy o

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nnet ( 20306 )
      No embassies either.

    • The Moon belongs to EVERYONE

      One of the great song lyrics of all time:

      https://youtu.be/CQE8LVamYFk [youtu.be]

    • Enforced by whom? The only people with the actual ability to stop people from doing what you're worried about are the very people you're worried will secretly do those things.

      In practical terms, whoever proclaims ownership of the moon (or part of it) and defends the claim (possibly involving violence) owns the moon (or the part the claimed to own). Since there is no value in making a claim or way to defend a claim at the moment, nobody owns the moon.

      • Agreed to by all countries, and enforced by all countries. Can't be any other way. Any country violates the agreement, they get jumped on by everyone else.

        • Agreed to by all countries, and enforced by all countries. Can't be any other way. Any country violates the agreement, they get jumped on by everyone else.

          So, you're in favour of starting WW3 if, say, China lays claim to the Sea of Tranquility by establishing a permanent base there?

          Bit of an overreaction, I am thinking....

          • You clearly didn't bother to read or understand what I wrote, did you? They can have a base there all they want -- so long as it's not miliary, and so long as they don't claim to own the WHOLE MOON. That clear enough for you?

    • > Similar to how the Embassy of any given country, within the borders of another country, is considered to be part of the Embassys' home country.

      Except it isn't and never has been.

      Vienna Convention: "Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolable and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission."

      This is erroneously taken to mean that an embassy is foreign soil.

      Most of the time the guest country doesn't even own the embassy b

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ogive17 ( 691899 )
      I'm ok with a limited number of structures on the moon but do not feel there should be any mining of the moon.
    • A clear lesson from history is "If you can defend your claim, it's yours." If you foolishly think a bunch of laws trump guns you are clearly ignorant of the current state of Palestine.

    • No military bases, of any country, on the Moon, again for obvious reasons.

      Ok, you volunteering to remove the secret Space Nazi base on the dark side of the moon? Anyone?

  • hyperbole (Score:3)

    by jm007 ( 746228 ) on Friday July 20, 2018 @03:52PM (#56982310)
    "This is a major debate currently raging in the international community"

    I hear one guy even had to re-tape his coke-bottle glasses during one their debate-cum-riots
  • We the people of Sirius 9 own your pitiful rock satellite. Do not attempt to place a base there. You will be annihilated by a squadron of attack ships if you choose to do so. You have been warned.
    • Surely, you cannot be serious!! (And no, I will not stop calling you Shirley.) If you are really from Sirius 9, you are very confused about the ownership of OUR moon. In fact, I would have to say that you are Siriusly confused.

  • And I demand that Trump deport me there.

  • I thought everybody knew this.

  • There is an American flag on the Moon, so I assume Vladimir Putin believes it now belongs to him.

    • Bleached to white decades ago, so French flag.

      • Bleached to white decades ago

        Fake news. These colors don't run. Except from Putin.

        • Get a new obsession. Russia is economically the size of New York City. Not even a world player. A resource export economy, like Nigeria. Russia exports energy and prostitutes. Price taker.

          • Get a new obsession. Russia is economically the size of New York City. Not even a world player.

            Japan wasn't a world player in 1935.

            Russia exports energy and prostitutes.

            That's not a very nice way to talk about the First Lady.

            • That's not a very nice way to talk about the First Lady.

              I know that some Americans such as yourself are completely ignorant about the rest of the world, but there are actually more countries than just America and Russia. One would think that you would at least recognise a country you bombed a couple decades ago.

              • know that some Americans such as yourself are completely ignorant about the rest of the world, but there are actually more countries than just America and Russia

                Russia has it's eye on Slovenia. It was a Soviet client state once, and it will be again if Putin has his way.

                • It was a Soviet client state once

                  It's adorable when you pretend to know stuff, but back in the real world Slovenia had been a part of the Austrian empire and then became a province of Yugoslavia ... several years before "Teh Soviets" even existed.

                  But all of those places are over there around that "Europe" are, though, so like they're all the same anyway, right?

                  • and then became a province of Yugoslavia

                    What do you think Yugoslavia was? I've lived and worked in Belgrade and own property there and in Montenegro. I am well aware of the former Soviet influence in Yugoslavia and Putin's current attempts to exert control there.

                    • What do you think Yugoslavia was?

                      A sovereign state with a neural position on the split between the iron curtain and the western bloc, which was friendly with both the USA and the USSR. During the height of the cold war they managed to sell America the infamous Yugo, and had military personnel posted in the USA as part of cultural/military exchange programs.

                      If that's your definition of "Soviet client state" you're even more delusional than I previously thought.

                      I've lived and worked in Belgrade and own property there and in Montenegro.

                      This is a bit like the old "I have a black friend" routine. Regardless of wheth

                    • A sovereign state with a neural position on the split between the iron curtain and the western bloc

                      You're silly. It was nothing of the sort.

                      During the height of the cold war they managed to sell America the infamous Yugo,

                      The Cold War ran from 1947 to 1991. The Yugo, marketed with the help of Armand Hammer, did not start selling in the US until 1984. If you believe that was the "height" of the Cold War, then nothing you say in this discussion can be taken seriously.

                    • You're silly. It was nothing of the sort.

                      You might want to pick up a history book now and then instead of pretending to be a property owner.

                      The Cold War ran from 1947 to 1991. The Yugo, marketed with the help of Armand Hammer, did not start selling in the US until 1984. If you believe that was the "height" of the Cold War, then nothing you say in this discussion can be taken seriously.

                      I see. So your claim is that Melania Trump is a "Russian export" because she was born in the nation of Yugoslavia which had a great relationship with the USA but didn't sell it the Yugo until 1984.

                      Strong argument there. Can't argue with your logic.

  • Whoever can and will defend it. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Might makes right, no matter what starry-eyed people say.

  • Who owns any planet/moon/asteroid or whatever should be answered by, "no one", but at the same time, any probe, colonization platform, or spacecraft should be owned by whoever put it there. If a miner is on an asteroid and is working to mine resources, that miner is what should be protected, and certain rights about space around said miner should be "claimed". Any claim should have an expiration period to make sure things are not claimed and then abandoned, with an extension based on "good faith" claims

  • PLACE A SPACE-MISSILE BATTERY ON THE MOON. Stick some nukes in it for fun... cuz America.

    Now you can deny anybody access to space until you run outta missiles. I guarantee this is going to happen eventually. Might as well get started today.

    Or I guess we can wait for China to show us how it's done. Then once it's been used a few times, the huge amounts of way-to-small-to-track (WTSTT) space garbage will deny everybody access, and we can all just fester and die on our doomed planet.

  • If im living on the moon and some entity has a problem with it fine. Come serve me papers telling me when I have to show up for court. Otherwise STFU

  • I think the real question is "Is owning the moon worth fighting a war over". Doubtless this is where any such claim would immediately lead.

    • If you build an automated factory on the moon building orbital solar power stations and catapulting them into earth orbit, then it's worth fighting over. For mining? No, the shipping costs are too high.

  • The Moon owns the Earth.

    The laws that matter are the laws of physics.

    as Mike said, "Luna has many rocks"
    and the high ground

    • But how many electromagnetic coil equipped aeroshells does the Moon have to put the rocks in? EM launchers can't move rocks, and rocks by themselves can't stand high angle entry into the atmosphere.

      And how many electromagnetic launchers with power supplies does the Moon have that can withstand nuclear attack? Such a system could only do substantial damage on Earth with a very long, slow bombardment, lasting weeks or months. People on Earth will do something about that.

      There is at best only a 19-fold energy

  • Would the earth countries gang up and take the moon back? It might be a losing proposition for earthlings and the whole earth becomes a planet of slaves, if there are any humans left alive.

    • You honestly think that if aliens claim the moon, who have advanced technology that allows for space travel, etc. that they are going to be defeated by a bunch of technology illiterate monkeys, aka humans??? Methinks you have been watching too much Independence Day.

      --
      Humans are some of the dumbest "intelligent" species in the Galaxy. Animals have lived for Billions of years without currency, yet humans are still too stupid to figure this shit out.

      • A little bit of sarcasm here. The earthlings would likely either be slaves or destroyed. Or, remember the Twilight Zone episode involving the very tall aliens that ended up raising humans for food. The must have had a pretty cheap energy source to be able fatten up people and transport them to some faraway planet.

        • There is a 3rd choice. They wouldn't _need_ human slaves because they have far superior technology, so they would leave us alone.

          You'll find out in ~2030 which choice they make.

          • I think they'd want Earth, we have a nice cozy blue planet in the habitable zone, even with a little extra CO2, "what plants crave".

            So they engineer a virus or some grey goo and kill all humans. Then, pop open a cold one on their new acquisition.

  • This is all pretty silly (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ferretman ( 224859 ) <`ferretman' `at' `gameai.com'> on Friday July 20, 2018 @08:07PM (#56983344) Homepage
    Of *course* the Moon and everyplace will developed individually...some by corporations, some by alliances, some by new nation states as we expand out into the solar system. I expect a wild and wooly mix, and that's okay.

    This silliness that "everything is owned by the common group called Mankind" will last until about 10 minutes after the first mining ship arrives to bring back a load of gold or something.

    Ferret

  • As with all things, sadly.

  • Whoever has the most firepower. As usual. If I find means to get a sustainable society up there and we have enough military force to defend our moon I can officially call myself King of the Moon. If my peasants let me that is. If not, it's probably "Republic of Moon" or something.
    Same thing with Mars. If you can go and seize it and are strong enough to sustain your living there and defend the planet it's yours.
    This is how it will be one we're powerful enough to build societies in space.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.

Close