Author Topic: The Outer Space Treaty and The Free Enterprise Act: Is international space law a help or a hindrance?  (Read 1261 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,402
Space News by Mark Sundahl — May 21, 2017

On May 23, the space subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on how the Outer Space Treaty (OST) will impact the future of American commerce in space. This hearing follows the release of a draft House bill that addresses the regulation of private space activity titled the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (FEA) of 2017. These two events go hand in hand because Section 10 of the FEA requires the White House to issue a report within 180 days of enactment explaining:

    How the OST and other space treaties “impede… private sector investment.”
    The benefits and drawbacks of withdrawal from the treaties.
    Whether the U.S. should propose amendments to the OST.

Conspicuously absent is the following question: how does the OST benefit private investment? If Congress asks the White House to focus primarily on how the OST impedes private investment, the content of the report will be predetermined to focus on the flaws in the treaties without enumerating their many benefits. Such a report could set the stage for withdrawing from the treaties, which would be catastrophic for the future of private sector investment (and I am normally not a catastrophizer).

Could the OST be improved by amendment? Certainly. Much has been written about certain aspects of the treaties that no longer fit the modern realities of space commerce, such as not providing for the transfer of space object registrations, but the benefits of the OST far outweigh its flaws. After all, the U.S. was a primary drafter of the OST and the U.S. delegation was committed to providing for the encouragement and protection of private industry, despite the fact that the treaty was drafted when the current state of space commerce was a distant dream. It is because of the OST that U.S. companies can operate freely in a safe and orderly environment. This is the result of provisions in the treaty that preserve peace in space, recognize the legality of private activity in space, ensure the “free use” of outer space by countries and their nationals, prevent other countries from appropriating celestial bodies and require that nationals of other countries operate in “due regard” to the activities of U.S. companies.

More: http://spacenews.com/the-outer-space-treaty-and-the-free-enterprise-act-is-international-space-law-a-help-or-a-hindrance/

Offline Cripplecreek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,718
  • Gender: Male
  • Constitutional Extremist
Minimal laws would be best.

Basically an international crime to destroy property or kill others to take claimed properties.

Offline Suppressed

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,921
  • Gender: Male
    • Avatar
« Last Edit: May 31, 2017, 02:47:15 pm by Suppressed »
+++++++++
“In the outside world, I'm a simple geologist. But in here .... I am Falcor, Defender of the Alliance” --Randy Marsh

“The most effectual means of being secure against pain is to retire within ourselves, and to suffice for our own happiness.” -- Thomas Jefferson

“He's so dumb he thinks a Mexican border pays rent.” --Foghorn Leghorn