Could corporations control territory in space? Under new US rules, it might be possible:
First, the Artemis Accords go beyond simply rejecting the unpopular 1979 Moon Agreement, which declared lunar resources to be the "common heritage of mankind" and committed parties to establish an international regime to oversee space mining. Only 18 countries have signed the treaty.
In its place, the accords envisage a US-centric framework of bilateral agreements in which "partner nations" agree to follow US-drafted rules.
Second, the accords introduce the concept of "safety zones" around lunar operations.
Although territorial claims in space are prohibited under international law, these safety zones would seek to protect commercial and scientific sites from inadvertent collisions and other forms of "harmful interference". What kinds of conduct could count as harmful interference remains to be determined.
Previously:
(2020-06-02) Third European Service Module for Artemis Mission to Land Astronauts on the Moon
(2020-05-16) NASA Wants Partner Nations to Agree to "Artemis Accords" for Lunar Exploration
(2020-03-12) CoronaVirus (SARS-CoV-2) Roundup 2020-03-12
(2018-07-22) Who Owns The Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers
(2018-03-07) China to Recruit Civilian Astronauts, Partner With Russia on Upcoming Missions
(2018-01-09) Russia Assembles Engineering Group for Lunar Activities and the Deep Space Gateway
(2017-10-18) Bigelow and ULA to Put Inflatable Module in Orbit Around the Moon by 2022
(2015-11-26) Who Owns Space? USA's Asteroid-Mining Act is Dangerous and Potentially Illegal
Robert Heinlein explored the notion in a novel. Does the future of space exploration lie with governments or corporations?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 06 2020, @05:12PM (2 children)
So when you come with a loathsome kangaroo court idea and present it as coming from a opponent of Trump, doing your part to support and enable Trump, how many years in prison do you think you deserve for that? Five? Ten? Just put you against the wall?
Fortunately, wiser heads prevailed after the US Civil War.
Taking testimony from people who suffered real harm under apartheid is very different than going on a witch hunt for "enablers".
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday June 08 2020, @12:59PM (1 child)
No jail time or execution if there is a sincere apology.
If they just would have let Sherman finish the job we might not have had Jim Crow and still be living with the South's racist legacy. And we damn sure wouldn't have statues of Confederate traitors all over the South.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 09 2020, @04:31AM
With his elite corps of unicorns right? Military defeat doesn't eliminate racism.
I think a sincere "fuck you" suffices here.