Yesterday 09:24 PM
(This post was last modified: Yesterday 11:35 PM by C C.)
https://reason.com/2026/06/09/why-you-ca...ty-rights/
EXCERPT: Some of these countries are now demanding that you hand over a significant share of your profits to people who have never had anything to do with asteroid mining—many of whom couldn't even say exactly what an asteroid is, let alone launch rockets into orbit.
They invoke Article IV, Paragraph 1, and Article XI, Paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Moon Agreement, which state: "The exploration and use of the Moon shall be the province of all mankind and shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic and scientific development. Due regard shall be paid to the interests of present and future generations as well as to the need to promote higher standards of living and conditions of economic and social progress and development in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." So much for Article IV.
Article XI states: "The Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind. 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."
The Moon Agreement, since signed by 22 countries and ratified by 18, was developed to work in the same way as seabed law, and a delegate from Sri Lanka explained in simple terms what the intention was: "If you touch the nodules [valuable mineral deposits on the seabed] at the bottom of the sea, you touch my property. If you take them away, you take away my property."
The plaintiffs now demand their "rightful share" of your profits, arguing that the platinum belongs not to you, but to all of humanity—and especially to developing countries, many of which are not yet engaged in space exploration. Should the plaintiffs win, neither you nor any other company would ever be able to attract investors again. Asteroid mining would be dead and buried after this very first attempt.
Suffice it to say: Investors can remain confident, as a lawsuit based on a treaty signed by only a small number of countries is unlikely to succeed. But consider a second thought experiment...
[...] The settlers have repeatedly attempted to establish private property rights and even create a digital land registry, but legal experts keep putting a stop to their efforts. This time, the problem is not the 1984 Moon Agreement, but the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST) ... What can be done when a treaty, in this case the OST, is open to so many different interpretations? First, it could be renegotiated...
[...] So, who should have the right to acquire property in space? My answer: those who have the financial means to get there, develop, and use the land. [...] However, we would need to tread carefully: If the Chinese were the first to reach Mars, it is possible they would declare the entire planet as belonging to China... (MORE - missing details)
EXCERPT: Some of these countries are now demanding that you hand over a significant share of your profits to people who have never had anything to do with asteroid mining—many of whom couldn't even say exactly what an asteroid is, let alone launch rockets into orbit.
They invoke Article IV, Paragraph 1, and Article XI, Paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Moon Agreement, which state: "The exploration and use of the Moon shall be the province of all mankind and shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic and scientific development. Due regard shall be paid to the interests of present and future generations as well as to the need to promote higher standards of living and conditions of economic and social progress and development in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." So much for Article IV.
Article XI states: "The Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind. 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."
The Moon Agreement, since signed by 22 countries and ratified by 18, was developed to work in the same way as seabed law, and a delegate from Sri Lanka explained in simple terms what the intention was: "If you touch the nodules [valuable mineral deposits on the seabed] at the bottom of the sea, you touch my property. If you take them away, you take away my property."
The plaintiffs now demand their "rightful share" of your profits, arguing that the platinum belongs not to you, but to all of humanity—and especially to developing countries, many of which are not yet engaged in space exploration. Should the plaintiffs win, neither you nor any other company would ever be able to attract investors again. Asteroid mining would be dead and buried after this very first attempt.
Suffice it to say: Investors can remain confident, as a lawsuit based on a treaty signed by only a small number of countries is unlikely to succeed. But consider a second thought experiment...
[...] The settlers have repeatedly attempted to establish private property rights and even create a digital land registry, but legal experts keep putting a stop to their efforts. This time, the problem is not the 1984 Moon Agreement, but the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST) ... What can be done when a treaty, in this case the OST, is open to so many different interpretations? First, it could be renegotiated...
[...] So, who should have the right to acquire property in space? My answer: those who have the financial means to get there, develop, and use the land. [...] However, we would need to tread carefully: If the Chinese were the first to reach Mars, it is possible they would declare the entire planet as belonging to China... (MORE - missing details)
