5 thoughts on “Space Property Rights”

1. Haven’t read it all yet, but his presumption of common ownership seems a big red warning light.

2. The foundation the OST is built on is marxism which fact alone should make it null and void. The bad assumption in the pdf is dispute between parties when real estate will be abundant for generations.

   The solution is for parties to be bound by a charter that enforces property rights, enforcement that all members of the charter agree to before going to mars. Non-members (establishing whatever rules they do) will be faced with an already established and enforced set of rules.

   In most cases disputes outside the charter framework can simply be ignored. If not, negotiation should allow all to be satisfied because there is more than enough land for everybody (for the first century at least after which things should just settle down.)

   The only provision of the OST worth keeping is no national sovereignty.

   1. The Outer SpaceTreaty is built on the Roman proprty law concept of Res communis or the province of all mankind meaning no government or private individual can claim ownership; it isn’t Marxism.

   2. I would also note without national sovereignty you can’t have private property rights. The natural law argument doesn’t work either; Nemitz tried that to no avail.

3. without national sovereignty you can’t have private property rights

   False. Property rights are fundamentally simple. First land is claimed. That claim can be made by anybody. Second, that claim is defended by various non exclusive means.

   Typically chain of title is enough to determine ownership.

Comments are closed.