Search

The article explores the legal complexities surrounding the protection of non-Earth satellites, specifically lunar satellites and the emerging cyberthreats facing these satellites within the burgeoning lunar economy. Cited are the right of affected states to self-defense, a discussion of Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty (OST), and the conclusion that Article IV of the OST should not be interpreted as to impede the right of self-defense for lunar satellites from cyberattacks.

Lunar exploration and exploitation have thrived in recent years due to advancements in space technology and the increasing demand for better utilization of the moon. These activities fall within the realm of outer space activities, mainly governed by international space treaties. However, lunar exploration, especially resource exploitation, is challenging to conduct at the moment under a definitive and generally acknowledged space treaty. The Moon Agreement, as the specific international space treaty addressing these activities, is not currently functioning well. Inspired by the US, several nations opposed to the Moon Agreement have chosen to enact national legislation to address the legal uncertainty. The US has initiated international accords unilaterally in an attempt to establish standards for rules on lunar exploration and exploitation, which has generated significant influence. As one of the major players in this arena, China must face this competitive situation and assume responsibility for establishing a harmonious environment for lunar exploration and exploitation. Instead of emulating the US approach and getting entangled in the competition of rule-making, China should consider accession to the Moon Agreement as a means to attain legal certainty, not only for its own requirements but also to contribute to the realization of international cooperation through space treaties adopted by the United Nations to the fullest extent. • Demonstration on the reasons that China could take acceding to the Moon Agreement as a grip to acquire legal certainty. • Benefit analysis for China to accede to the Moon Agreement. • Discussion on how China's accession could increase the Moon Agreement's influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the broad background of existing "Earth law", this article aims to provide an initial assessment of existing "Space law" to start the conversation about what is still needed from a legal perspective to best facilitate the ongoing "commercialisation of Outer Space". This article considers the ongoing commercialisation of Outer Space primarily from a legal perspective, investigating the rol law (Earth law as well as Space law) and so‐called "space lawyers" may be able to play in it. The focus of the article is to, first and foremost, raise some key questions that need (legal) consideration, without attempting to already provide answers to any of those questions. The article starts by addressing the relevance now of commercialisation of Outer Space and therefore the question asked in the title. It then goes on to briefly explore the existing Space law, highlighting separately the most relevant Space Treaties and Space Principles. Against that background, the article then reflects on what (if any) guidance this provides on the key concept of Space Property. In addition, the article also briefly addresses the 2001 Cape Town Convention on international interests in mobile equipment and explains why this convention, and in particular its Space Protocol, are also very relevant to consider in the context of the commercialisation of Outer Space. Finally, the article provides its initial assessment and ends with a number of concluding remarks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Outer Space Treaty (OST) is the foundation of all international space regulation. It establishes space as the province of all humankind and promotes its peaceful use and exploration for the benefit and in the interests of all countries. In 2020, the FCC released its "Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age" guidelines for commercial satellite applicants. While these guidelines appear to substantively address the risks posed by orbital debris to Earth and space industries, they fail to do so in two key areas: (1) by not adopting specific requirements for applicants to share data needed to effectively establish space situational awareness (SSA); and (2) by not requiring applicants to prepare an Environmental Assessment on low Earth orbits (LEO). This article exposes fatal flaws in how the FCC regulates satellite operator access to LEO by examining how the regulation of satellite constellations enables the creation of orbital debris and occupation of orbital shells in a manner that may compromise Earth's satellite‐based information infrastructure and violate the OST, and it recommends legislative language that will ensure FCC regulations are in compliance with the OST and are sufficient for establishing SSA. Given the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, adopting such language constitutes a clear congressional authorization to protect Earth's orbital environment and helps operationalize the OST's proclamation that spacefaring activities be for the benefit and in the interests of all countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Commercial Human Spaceflight – a new addition to the commercial activities in outer space – is attracting the ultra-rich section of the society. It has enormous potential to accelerate the economic aspect of commercial spaceflight since with the development of reusable technologies it is expected to become cheaper. At the same time, it poses a severe threat in various ways to the status quo of the existing regime of space regulation. Taking humans to outer space as a passenger affects the current social, psychological, political, and legal setup. The paper highlights the legal issues that are arising from commercial human spaceflights. Therefore, in section one, the article discusses applicable international law to this emerging activities. Part two details specifically on the international space law that is relevant to regulate these activities. After analyzing the existing international law on space activities in sections one and two, which are essential for the commercial human spaceflights, part three identifies several legal challenges that are not sufficiently addressed by the existing laws. Section four examines the role played by the regulatory organization to develop the space law, and the role of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has been discussed in detail. As the ICAO holds good experience in handling air transportation, many believe that the ICAO is naturally well placed to regulate commercial space transportation. This aspect has been elaborated in detail in this part. In the fifth, i.e. the last section, the authors conclude by arguing to develop a new international convention to regulate it.

The article is devoted to the study and research of contemporary legal issues in the field of international space law. Today we are witnessing the rapid and unstoppable development of the space industry. Such cooperation requires an appropriate legal framework. In this article, we will review the leading normative legal acts regulating relations in outer space today and analyze current development trends and problems. Space law is a relatively new branch of international public law, involving a combination of customs and treaties. The legislative framework of the space industry is expanding accordingly to the subject that is regulated. One of the main issues that are investigated in this article is the search for a balance between free access of humanity to the space and the opportunity to establish ownership of certain study objects in outer space. The ability to develop the right of ownership of private enterprises, companies, research centers is extremely important for the economic development of the space industry. This article aims to provide a holistic understanding of current trends and challenges in space law with particular emphasis on such issues as space tourism, the “new space” and climate change. The article will examine the founding treaties of space law, the legal framework, and scientific literature concerning space law. The leading goal of this article is to highlight new trends and prospects of space research, the exploration of new perspectives, which are distributed today in the field of outer space, and search of ways of its solution within the framework of legislative regulation.

This article critically engages with the role of the United States in leading two projects of institution building under international law from the perspective of neo-Gramscian critical theory. Gramscian theories of hegemony, conceived originally in the context of Italian workers' council movements and the anti-fascism of the early 1920s, have been appropriated to explain hegemony in post-positivist international relations theory and global political economy. This article posits that such theories are similarly useful in understanding the nature of international legal institutions and the work of international law in systemic ordering. This analysis suggests that hegemony takes place when materialism and legitimacy, mutually constituted, are mechanised in such a way as to stabilise one state's authority as the predominant state. In carrying out a dual intervention and deconstructing the institutionalisation of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and the dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade Organization, which remain major instruments serving the economic and security apparatus of the United States today, this article demonstrates that international institutions and conference diplomacy, which provide the forum in which convergent norms and expectations about state behaviour are developed, are essential machinery in the manufacturing and maintenance of consent in hegemonic systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Soon there will be private industry on the moon, but the question of how property rights will be apportioned, transferred, and adjudicated is still unanswered. Further complicating the matter is the founding document of space law, the Outer Space Treaty, which disallows sovereign appropriation of space resources but remains silent on whether the same prohibition extends to private companies. Since the ratification of this seminal document, no major legislation has been passed except for the "Space Act," a U.S. statute that takes the decidedly pro-American-business stance that the Outer Space Treaty's silence on private appropriation was intended to be permissive rather than prohibitive. The Artemis Accords, drafted in 2020 by NASA and signed by eight developed countries, comports with this view. This Note looks at how U.S. companies might be able to honor the spirit of the nonappropriation clause while still creating opportunities to transact business on the Moon. It begins with a historical overview of Western ideas of property, including a discussion of the relational aspects of property rights and the tragedy of the commons, as well as a brief discussion of the Mining Law of 1872 and the concept of pedis possessio. The Note then advocates for an approach that combines the "multiple use" permitting system employed by the Bureau of Land Management with the enforcement mechanism of a self-regulatory organization, as well as dispute resolution inspired by international arbitration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of the commercial space industry endangers the preservation of environments, such as the lunar surface and other celestial bodies, with the threat of contamination and resource exploitation. In the coming decades, flights to space will become commonplace--but at present, there is no way to hold outer space polluters accountable. The existing international legal regime is weak, with the United Nations' space treaties offering limited enforcement mechanisms against offenders. The increasingly popular concept of environmental personhood offers a solution by rethinking the meaning of a juridical person within the text of the United Nations Outer Space, Space Liability, and Moon treaties. Utilizing the International Court of Justice, outer space environmentalists can seek to recognize celestial bodies as juridical persons and gain third-party standing to protect the rights of the Moon and seek damages for environmental degradation. Through the exploration of contentious and advisory avenues within the International Court of Justice, this Comment advances a new way of thinking to save extraterrestrial environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the U.S. commitment to the major international space treaty, the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space that was adopted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly. It mentions opportunity for the international community to clarify and update defunct international space law. It also mentions space debris is a common interest held by all parties and could be the common interest.

Since 1967, most activity in space has been governed by the Outer Space Treaty's 'Mankind Principle,' which states, in part, that all of space, including planets, moons, and asteroids, are the common property of humankind. The treaty was signed at the height of the Cold War in an attempt to minimize the likelihood of conflict over terrestrial objects in space. However, it has ultimately resulted in increasing the likelihood of conflict today. With the passage of the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act in 2015, the United States has joined an increasing list of nations promoting the exploration and commercialization of space. Additionally, for the first time in human history, private companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have the technological capacity for private space enterprise, including tourism and mining. As more nations and private companies seek to capitalize on the vast resources available in space, the likelihood increases that nations will shirk their obligations under the Outer Space Treaty and begin to allow companies to extract resources for their own benefit. These actions will then increase the likelihood of conflict between rival nations. This Note explores the historical ways humans have divided land in the past and provides a background of the history of property law in space. It then identifies key areas where the Outer Space Treaty is holding nations and companies back and exposes several ways nations are already beginning to ignore the Treaty in order to promote domestic space industries. Finally, by analyzing prior failed Cold War treaties with similar 'Mankind' provisions, this Note promotes a comprehensive vision of colonization of space, aiming to divide land amongst nations in order to foster a uniform system of rules, while being permissive of private industry in space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the need to regulate geospace activities and proposes a regulatory solution using a conceptual liability regime. Also cited are how the proposal achieves equitable benefit-sharing without implementing undue liability on major space players like Russia, China, and the U.S., the Outer Space Treaty (OST), the proposal of Garrett Hardin, and the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects.

The granting of intellectual property rights to outer space activities is of great significance for the sustainable development of space commercialisation. While the space treaties and intellectual property treaties contain no legal provision which explicitly mentions the protection of intellectual property rights in outer space, it does not necessarily mean that there is a legal loophole in this regard. This article argues that art VIII of the Outer Space Treaty itself offers a self-contained mechanism that would enable guaranteed levels of functional intellectual property rights in outer space. This mechanism uses space objects as a connecting factor to link space activities with existing laws to realise functional sovereignty. Thus, art VIII provides a solid legal foundation for enhanced space legislation by individual countries: intellectual property rights stemming from space activities remain legally protected through the extension of existing intellectual property laws. In the long run, the legal harmonisation of an international treaty for intellectual property protection in outer space may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article studies the current state of affairs in national space activities. The legal problems facing the space industry at the present stage, the mechanism of their solution are analyzed. The author highlights the crucial issue, which requires an immediate solution regarding the location of the launch site for domestic space objects. The special role of the State in ensuring the legal conditions for the development of national space activities, which should be carried out using good in law modern methods and means of public regulation, is determined. Nowadays, the legislation of Ukraine on space activities requires significant changes and additions, taking into account the new space realities and instruments for the development of public relations in the field of space exploration and use. The author argues that a strategy for the development of space activities in Ukraine, public administration of the space industry, as well as ensuring its restructuring require a substantial rethinking and improvement. The relevance of the legal framework for the creation and use of space defense and dual-use space technology in the interests of the national security and defense sector is underlined. The author argues that the Concept of Ukrainian law reform on space activities, including the legal rationale for choosing the optimal behavior model regarding the solution of complex legal problems based on modern space-legal doctrine and practice of space relations, should be developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mainly, the studies of China-Ukraine relations have focused on topics such as trade agreements, commodity exports, investment, migration, and geopolitical implications for the post-Cold War world order. The issue of space cooperation has been almost completely absent in the studies of China-Ukraine cooperation, despite the central importance of space technology for many spheres of life, which have stimulated research and political participation since the beginning of the millennium. Bilateral cooperation on space exploration between China and Ukraine began in 1992 and has already celebrated its twentieth anniversary. This cooperation is an important determinant of what is considered "new" or "modern" geography of China-Ukraine cooperation. In this article, the study of collections, legal documents, and interviews enables to analyze the strategies of cooperation between China and Ukraine in space briefly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the study and research of contemporary legal issues in the field of international space law. Today we are witnessing the rapid and unstoppable development of the space industry. Such cooperation requires an appropriate legal framework. In this article, we will review the leading normative legal acts regulating relations in outer space today and analyze current development trends and problems. Space law is a relatively new branch of international public law, involving a combination of customs and treaties. The legislative framework of the space industry is expanding accordingly to the subject that is regulated. One of the main issues that are investigated in this article is the search for a balance between free access of humanity to the space and the opportunity to establish ownership of certain study objects in outer space. The ability to develop the right of ownership of private enterprises, companies, research centers is extremely important for the economic development of the space industry. This article aims to provide a holistic understanding of current trends and challenges in space law with particular emphasis on such issues as space tourism, the "new space" and climate change. The article will examine the founding treaties of space law, the legal framework, and scientific literature concerning space law. The leading goal of this article is to highlight new trends and prospects of space research, the exploration of new perspectives, which are distributed today in the field of outer space, and search of ways of its solution within the framework of legislative regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cold War gave rise to more than just turmoil on Earth; it was also the impetus for five space treaties that still govern how countries access and interact in outer space today. Yet, technology has elevated humanity's capabilities far above that which was foreseeable to the treaties' drafters. First, the growth of privatized space transportation companies, such as SpaceX, has illuminated potential flaws in the treaties with regard to enforcement mechanisms. Further, the advent of colonizing the Moon and Mars and the idea to mine the Moon and asteroids highlights the possibility that the treaties may leave the door open to a tragedy of the commons. Finally, the technological leaps in weaponry made in the last fifty years has made the treaties almost inapplicable to today's weapons, which renders maintaining peace in space for the future questionable. Consequently, the space treaties are in desperate need of modernization. The parties to the treaties should amend the treaties to include enforcement mechanisms and identify a dispute resolution process. Additionally, the parties should better define ambiguous terms in the treaties that leave space susceptible to a tragedy of the commons. Finally, the parties should amend the treaties to prohibit a wider variety of weapons, including those unanticipated by the drafters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses why authorities should use soft law measures to regulate the rendezvous and proximity operation (RPO) industry. Also cited are the possible use of RPOs to eliminate space debris and refuel satellites, the treaties that regulate outer space activities of different countries, the differences between hard law and soft law, as well as the types of RPOs like on-orbit servicing and active debris removal.

The article discusses developments in international space law for the protection of patents in outer space. Other topics include the international treaties regulating space activities, how national space laws monitor the interests of private entities with space projects, and the proposed global patent jurisdiction to harmonize the regulatory regimes to protect outer space patents.

The article offers information related to the applying of terrestrial patent laws to private outer space activity. It also mentions that human exploration beyond Earth has progressed dramatically since the Wright brothers' initial public airplane flight in 1908. It also examines that laws of the time are underinclusive of air transportation of people and goods.

Three decades ago, Dr. J. Henry Glazer, onetime Chief Counsel for NASA Ames, proposed the establishment of a body of astrolaw. "The direct subjects of Space Law are sovereign nations" he observed. The four widely ratified space treaties contain principles and guidelines designed to govern the activities of State. Conversely, the direct subjects of astrolaw would be natural and legal persons in space. In Dr. Glazer's view, "astrolaw focuses not upon space as a legal regime, but upon space as a place." Our evolution into a spacefaring species, with single and then multiple human communities off-Earth, is a human necessity. Assuring the sustainability and success of those communities requires the development of guidelines and principles that recognize space as a place, and not a legal regime. We are experiencing a paradigm shift in how activities are conducted in space. Space actors are no longer just governments. And soon, humans in space will not all be government employees or contractors. Elon Musk has promised to send a spacecraft of civilians around the Moon, and more than one company is exploring the establishment of a private space station for use as a hotel. Not only will we have civilian tourists in space, we will have civilian workers to cater to their needs. Addressing on-orbit torts and crimes through the current space treaty regime would lead to jurisdictional absurdities and even diplomatic morass. This Article proposes that the advent and proliferation of space tourism should be the main frame from which we, as a society and global community, consider the regulation of extraterrestrial human civilization. The presentation advocates for the establishment of a Code of Conduct containing principles and guidelines designed to govern the activities and behavior of humans in space. The Code will be loosely modeled on the Code of Conduct for the Space Station Crew developed pursuant to the International Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement. However, rather than the individual remaining the responsibility of his or her national or sponsoring government, the individual shall be responsible for his or her own actions. This Article outlines the substantive terms of the Code of Conduct which, the author proposes should be adopted by national governments and implemented through national regulatory regimes. Establishing a Code of Conduct will lay the foundation for a universal law, astrolaw, in anticipation of the commonality of humans living, working and vacationing in space. It will support and sustain the success of extraterrestrial human communities. It will help prevent unnecessary conflict that may, because of State responsibility for nationals in space, easily rise to diplomatic crisis. And it will thwart the threat of dystopian tyranny on these private pockets of human civilization. Finally, it will assure the safety of the hardy souls that venture into space as private citizens and work responsibly to develop international guidelines that will prevent disasters, without stifling commercial industry, innovation and exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Has technology outrun the international law governing outer space? This dilemma presents itself as private entities become capable of space travel and new technology makes asteroid mining a reality. Although the Outer Space Treaty's "non-appropriation" principle prohibits nations from claiming sovereignty over space bodies, that restriction does not prevent resource extraction. The non-appropriation principle, interpreted alongside existing legal regimes, distinguishes between forbidden appropriation and permissible extraction. Consequently, the non-appropriation principle is most accurately viewed as a flexible premise from which the international community is free to fashion unique laws governing resource extraction in outer space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article advocates for the incorporation of the term "space piracy" into international law's lexicon and proposes a definition of the term to facilitate the inclusion of prohibitions against the practice in future space treaties and to address a developing threat to spacefaring activities. The Article provides an analysis of the current state of space law (as it relates to this Article), the development of international law in response to piratical acts, and the benefits of defining the term (beyond justifications for the term's adoption). The Article draws from modern treaty language that identifies the various forms of unlawful vessel and craft seizure to create a definition that is consistent with international law's treatment of piratical acts and tailored to the unique considerations of spacefaring activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Space arms control proposals such as the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space (PPWT) have failed to become treaties in spite of countless efforts over the past 50 years. These proposals will not work in the emerging space proximity-operations era. This article proposes a hybrid approach to space arms control based on restricting the locations in space of some potential space weapons while banning other types of space weapons outright. The core of any hybrid space arms control (HSAC) treaty should prohibit satellites, whether for antisatellite (ASAT) or peaceful purposes, from positioning too close to more than an innocuous threshold number of another country's satellites and authorize preemptive self-defense as a last resort countermeasure. This article also proposes a comprehensive list of space arms control measures, which can be added to the core proposal to more effectively manage both traditional and emerging space weapons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The creation and augmentation of the outer space governance regime during the twentieth century was guided by the use of analogies with other planetary domains. These analogies compare the “target” domain of outer space with various “source” domains, especially airspace, the seabed, the high seas, and Antarctica. These analogies, highlighted at different times to provide guidance on the regulation of existing and emerging space activities, shaped the fundamental principles and rules of the Outer Space Treaty. A survey of contemporary literature demonstrates that analogies continue to be used to structure thinking about outer space activities. This paper argues that such analogies are a misleading foundation for constructing a governance regime in outer space. They overlook essential and distinct features of outer space, and misguide the decisions of policymakers by influencing interest formation and problem definition. Six major features of the outer space environment are concealed by other-domain analogies, which helps explain why the use of analogies reduces the chances for effective governance. Scientific activity since the advent of the Space Age makes possible an alternative, non-analogic representation of outer space as a place, which has important implications for space governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the growing commercialization of outer space, the threat of damage to satellites from detritus hurtling through space could prevent the continued installation of satellites. The cure for this issue cannot simply come from mitigation efforts; governments and organizations involved in spacefaring activities must participate in active remediation measures. International space agency guidelines and U.S. statutes and regulations are productive preventative measures against further accumulation of debris. In addition, a number of organizations are working on new technology to actively reduce orbital debris. These active processes for culling debris from orbit are essential for the reduction of debris buildup. One possible barrier to the organizations looking to clean up outer space is property ownership rights. Enforcement of ownership rights rests with domestic law, which would accordingly need to be applied extraterritorially to satellites in space to uphold ownership interests. Though the U.S. Supreme Court has set forth a presumption against extraterritorial application of domestic laws, U.S. domestic laws apply in the narrow instance of suits arising when actions in international areas do not invoke international law or create a conflict of laws problem. With this the case, remediators should look to the doctrine of abandonment as a way to easily facilitate the capture of debris and defunct satellites. Under this doctrine, an owner has abandoned the property if he unilaterally relinquished "all title, possession, or claim to or of [the property]." Applying the abandonment doctrine to post-mission satellites can help determine the legal ramifications of trying to clean up post-mission satellites and how those actions might impact ownership rights. Owners generally take one of two actions as regards post-mission satellites: (1) leaving the satellite in its mission orbit or (2) moving the satellite from its mission orbit to its disposal orbit. When owners fail to move post-mission satellites into a disposal orbit, the satellites qualify as abandoned property and can therefore be captured. A more nuanced, case-by-case analysis must apply when owners take the prescribed steps to move post-mission satellites to a disposal orbit. While post-mission satellites can be analyzed through the doctrine of abandonment, orbital debris does not easily fit into the analysis and cannot be reduced through the avenue of abandonment and capture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outer space is the new battle ground and states are investing heavily to achieve military supremacy in space. There is no provision in any space treaty that explains what constitutes space and whether the celestial bodies are included in space or not. It is widely accepted that the moon and other celestial bodies should be used for the collective benefit of mankind and that no state should exploit space and celestial bodies to derive benefit by putting at risk the peace and security of other states. Thus, while the treaty regime calls for 'peaceful use' of space only, there is a conflict of interpretation regarding the phrase which is often limited to 'non-military use' or 'non-aggressive use'. In consequence of these lacunas in space-related treaty regimes - which should be removed to save it from subsequent weaponization - space has been used for military purposes for over fifty years by employing technology to locate and target enemies. The first step is to precisely define what constitutes space weapon, followed by adoption of non-binding code of conduct. However, ultimately, there is need for adoption of complete, equitable and verifiable ban on space weapons that are either already placed or will be placed in near future in space to attack humans and assets on space or earth, or are placed on earth to attack assets in space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analysis the shortcomings of the current laws governing international use of outer space, along with the threats posed by the same. Topics discussed include history of space agreements; impact of technological innovations on the same; and an analysis of Outer Space Treaty made for mitigating the threats posed on the outer space.

Third World Approaches to International Law or TWAIL is a useful starting point to assess space governance issues from the perspective of emerging or aspirant space actors and users because it helps to highlight imbalances and asymmetry around the supposed “legal right” to space benefit under Article I(1) of the Outer Space Treaty. However, a new analytical lens focused on Cosmopolitan Approaches to International Law or CAIL is proposed that can deconstruct the existing agenda in light of it obscuring the idea of shared benefits without attributing blame, scepticism or negativity, a charge often placed against TWAIL perspectives. This paper asks what one learns from the space law context that prompts us to reorient the frame of analysis that TWAIL perspective brings to bear and focus on a CAILian perspective. Primarily that a TWAILian approach is too one sided and polarized and that a CAILian approach acknowledges reciprocal responsibilities. It highlights the implications of the approach both for emerging and aspirant as well as established space nations specifically and for global space governance in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the need of a treaty that should be made between the U.S. and the most technologically advanced countries banning benefits derived from any technology used in outer space. It mentions that the treaty must contains the provision for protection form infringment of patents related to technologies currently in force in the U.S. or any other participating countries. NTP Inc. v. Research in Motion Ltd.

The article examines the legal challenges related to the military use of outer space as mandated in Article IV of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.