Space Law Probe

George Nield, acting AST chief

2008-01-14T11:15:00.000-08:00

I see no announcement or notice on FAA/AST's website but Patti Smith confirms via e-mail that, no surprise, deputy associate administrator Dr. George C. Nield will step in as AST acting associate administrator, as of Feb. 1, 2008.

And yes, George will be officiating at next month's big AST event, the 11th FAA Annual Commercial Space Transportation Conference: Roadmap to 2015, Feb. 5-6, 2008, Crystal City, Virginia. Here's the agenda. Look forward to seeing George there!

(And if you can't wait to hear George talk, here is a great podcast of his most recent appearance on The Space Show, last July.)

Patti Grace Smith Rockets On

2008-01-10T18:22:00.000-08:00

"Volatus per inane homo privatus." Stamp it on your rocket.

And find the translation in the text of FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation Patti Grace Smith's talk, Space Means Business, which she delivered at the Washington Space Business Roundtable last month (Dec. 6, 2007).

Patti's resignation from FAA/AST (which Clark Lindsey first reported on HobbySpace on Monday) is official, and here, also via Clark, is the announcement, including a statement by Patti.

As we all know, Patti has worked in the commercial space arena at the Department of Transportation since 1994. (Ah, remember the ol' OCST?) Under her leadership at FAA/AST, the office's ground breaking work served both the public and nascent space transportation industry and launched private space regulation into the new century. We imagine Patti in the room the first time a federal government official uttered the phrase "commercial space" without smirking (in fact, she may have been the government official who uttered it). Today, her office and work serve as a model for private spaceflight regulators worldwide.

Here are some thoughts Patti shared in her talk last month at WSBR:

When I spoke at the Space Business Roundtable in 1999, Space Adventures Ltd was only a year old.

In 1999 Bigelow Aerospace was founded. So was XCOR. At that time, there was no Armadillo, no Blue Origin, no SpaceX or Virgin Galactic.

The X Prize had not been won.

The Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 obviously had not been written. The FAA was not yet the agency in charge of private human spaceflight.

There were no regulations for experimental permits governing the testing of suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles. There were no regulations governing crew and passengers on suborbital flights. Between 1999 and today there have been nearly 200 expendable launch vehicle launch attempts.

As the result of a steady and durable momentum … matched to a growing awareness of opportunities in space … all those things are now realities.

Spaceflight is changing. The wide circle of activity is expanding. Future vehicles will not all have “Property of the U.S. Government” stamped on them … whether they fly from the States … or from states overseas.

The fact is there is a private industry out there building the next epoch of transportation.

There are no parallels. Nothing compares. The new civilian spaceflight business is altogether different from predecessor carriers.

The genus might be familiar, perhaps the species, too. But this is the first time they’ve appeared together. In Latin … Volatus per inane homo privatus. “Spaceflight. Human. Private.”

Whatever space has been up until today, it is an emerging business now....

Indeed.

In an e-mail today, Patti told me, "My plan is to stay connected to space in some new capacity. I am very excited about exploring that and seeing where it takes me. I am fully committed to this industry and have much still to contribute."

Splendid. For now, we say best of luck to Patti! We look forward to news of her next, no doubt bold, steps. Meanwhile, we thank her for years of support and leadership in launching the new era of commercial space.

Now more than ever -- as Patti says -- space means business.

Space law attractions '08

2008-01-07T16:57:00.000-08:00

Space-time flies and the action never stops for space lawyers and friends. Here's a quick scan of selected happenings of interest to the space law and business community in the new year. Much more to follow. Meanwhile, add these to your illustrious 2008 space law calendar and get ready to rocket from Vienna to Virginia, Paris to Phoenix, Mississippi to Nebraska, and over to Toronto, Montreal, Strasbourg, Singapore, Arcachon, Beijing, Cairo, Colorado, Nashville, New York, Rome, Geneva, Glasgow, Washington and beyond.

The global space law adventure continues....

-----------------------------------------

Cologne Commentary on Space Law (CoCoSL) First Authors’ Workshop - Jan. 10-11, 2008, at the premises of the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) in Vienna, Austria.

28th Inter-Agency Meeting on Outer Space Activities - hosted by the UN Operational Satellite Applications Programme (UNOSAT), Jan. 1-18, 2008, Geneva, Switzerland.

2nd International Conference on the State of Remote Sensing Law - Jan. 17-18, 2008, Mississippi School of Law, Oxford, Mississippi (register here).

The State of Space Security - Jan. 24, 2008, George Washington University, Washington, DC.

Accelerating Space Conference - Canadian Space Commerce Association, Jan. 26, 2008, Toronto, Canada.

ABA Forum on Air and Space Law 2008 Washington Update Conference, - Jan. 31, 2008, Washington, DC. And if you miss this Forum event, check out the gathering in Montreal in September.

11th FAA Annual Commercial Space Transportation Conference: Roadmap to 2015 - hosted by Patti Smith and her crew at AST, Feb. 5-6, 2008, Crystal City, Virginia (register here).

Space Exploration Alliance 2008 Legislative Blitz - Feb. 10-12, 2008, Washington, DC.

Global Space and Technology Convention '08 (GSTC) - organized by the Singapore Space & Technology Association, Feb. 19-14, 2008, Singapore.

12th Annual International Symposium: Space Solutions to Earth's Global Challenges, - presented by the International Space University and co-sponsors, Feb. 20-22, 2008, Strasbourg, France.

Satellite 2008: The Sixth Decade - Feb. 25-28, 2008, Washington, DC.

3rd Space Exploration Conference & Exhibit "50 Years of Space Exploration: Taking the Next Giant Leap" - the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) in collaboration with NASA, Feb. 26-28, 2008, Denver, Colorado.

Washington Space Business Roundtable - Flagship lunch and silent auction - Feb. 26, 2008, guest speaker, ITU director general Hamadoun Toure.

California Space Week Washington DC - March 3-7, 2008, Washington, DC (although we'd prefer California).

46th Robert H. Goddard Memorial Symposium - Exploration to Commercialization: Going to Work in Space - March 4-6, 2008, Greenbelt, Maryland.

ProSpace March Storm 2008 - March 9-12, 2008, Washington, DC. The citizens' space lobby meets lawmakers.

EURISY Workshop - Local and Regional Risk Management: Integrated Use of Satellite Information and Services March 10-11, 2008, Sinaia, Romania.

Outer Space Law Blasts Off - ABA CLE teleconference - Mar 19, 2008 12:00 PM

Space Access '08 - March 27-29, 2008, Phoenix, Arizona.

47th Session of the Legal Subcommittee of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space - March 31 - April 11, 2008, Vienna, Austria.

24th National Space Symposium "Our Expanding Universe...50 Years of Space Exploration" - April 7-10, 2008, Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Yuri's Night '08 - worldwide, April 12, 2008. Space lawyers party too.

ESA Investment Forum - organized by European Space Agency’s Technology Transfer Programme Office April 14-15, 2008, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

Toulouse Space Show - sponsored by CNES, April 22-25, 2008, Toulouse, France.

Global Space Development Summit - "The Next Space Race: Competition or Cooperation?" - April 23-25, 2008, CSIS/CSA, Beijing, China.

Space and Telecom Law Conference - "Formalism, Informalism, and Innovation in Space and International Telecommunications Law" - University of Nebraska College of Law, Lincoln, Nebraska, May 1-3, 2008.

AIAA 6th Responsive Space Conference - April 28 - May 2, 2008, Los Angeles, California.

IAA-RACT Space for Humanity - May 21-23, 2008, Korolev City, Russia.

2008 Women in Aerospace Golf Tournament - May 16, 2008, Waldorf, Maryland. (Couldn't resist throwing it in... You go girls!)

IAA Symposium on Private Manned Access to Space - May 28-30, 2008, Arcachon, France.

ISDC 2008 "The New Pace of Space" - May 29 - June 1, 2008, Washington, DC.

ITU Telecom Africa 2008 - May 12-15, 2008, Cairo, Egypt.

ISCe 2008 - June 10-12, 2008, San Diego, California. This combines the 7th Annual International Satellite & Communications exchange Conference and Expo (ISCe) and the 26th AIAA International Communications Satellite Systems Conference (ICSSC).

51st Session of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space - June 11-20, 2008, Vienna, Austria.

NewSpace 2008 - July 17-19, 2008, Crystal City, Virginia.

ITU Telecom Asia 2008 - Sept. 2-5, 2008, Bangkok, Thailand.

Euroconsult's World Satellite Business Week - Sept. 8-11, 2008, Paris, France.

ABA Forum on Air and Space Law Annual Conference - Sept. 17-20, 2008, Montreal, Canada (agenda to come).

59th International Astronautical Congress - Sept. 29 - Oct. 3, 2008, Glasgow, Scotland.

SATCON Satellite and Content Delivery Conference & Expo, Oct. 15-16, 2008, New York, New York. (Stop by and visit me when you're in town.)

3rd IAASS Conference: Building a Safer Space Together - that's the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety, Oct. 21-23, 2008, Rome, Italy.

GEOINT 2008 - presented by the United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF) Oct. 27-30, 2008, Nashville, Tennessee.

* * *

Other dates to come include, of course, the 2008 X-Prize Cup and all the hot events associated therewith; the European Centre for Space Law's (ECSL) summer course on space law and policy (this year's will be the 17th, if I recall correctly), and other events not yet scheduled as of this post (or, events to which I have yet to receive my gilded, engraved e-mail invite... no worries, SLP's inbox never closes... ;), much more.

For now, here is the Manfred Lachs space law moot court competition 2008 calendar (Concordia and Landia v. Usurpia). Good luck all moot counsel.

And in between all this action, keep up with the lineup of spaceflights scheduled for launch in 2008 (Helmit tip: HobbySpace, Spaceports.)

Every nanosecond counts.

Happy 2008!

Last Flybys of '07

2007-12-28T16:45:00.000-08:00

Ah, the end of yet another year. Which serves to remind us: Time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening all at once.

(It's not working.)

Before we ring in '08, a few late December flybys. (Also catch the 2007 year in space roundup on Cosmic Log -- and all the other annual overviews, lists, etc. linked on HobbySpace so of course I don't have to relink here).

COTS or Not? (I could do a whole COTS Flybys...): For now, the latest appears to be via a Brian Berger report in Space News (sub. req'd) that RpK will await the GAO's decision in February and hold off bringing suit against NASA over termination of the company's space act agreement. Meanwhile, I'm sure Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) has heard an earful about COTS funding cuts in the omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008 (which the president has signed.) Alas, we will see what the new year brings, COTS-wise.

Mojave matters: I did not see the "amendments" to Mojave Air and Space Port's license issued by FAA as reported in the Antelope Valley Press last weekend (and picked up at the Rocket Dungeon) but hopefully the situation, whatever it was, is resolved. (But wouldn't it be great if FAA/AST chief Patti Smith had her own blog so that we may quickly clear up spaceport rumors and other questions without Instapundit having to step in?)

Speaking of government blogs: I do want to congratulate Shana Dale, the lawyer who is second in command at NASA, on her blog's public coming out. Shana's Blog is now open on NASA's shiny new webship. (I had complained that Shana's blogging was available to NASA employees while the rest of us had to wait for SpaceRef to pick up her posts.)

Speaking of the relaunched NASA.gov: Ahem. If you are not of the uber-cool demographic NASA aims to attract -- yes, the universally coveted, coddled and wooed 18-24 year old MySpacers again -- with the newly revamped web destination, widgets, blogs and all, count yourself at least implicitly uninvited from commenting on the space agency's refurbished and upgraded corner of webspace. Even though you paid for NASA.gov. (And really, who among us oldsters is entirely convinced that all this is just about youth appeal? Some may suspect the space agency is in competition with other world space agencies to have the coolest government agency website on the planet. Let's see what the response will be from CNSA. Yes, the government space web race is on!) So how much did all this new customization, interactivity and other digital fun cost us aging taxpayers? Never mind. Will it solve the agency's fiscal problems, stop tiles from falling off the shuttle, keep the fuel sensors functioning, or help US win the 21st century space race? Nah. But dude, check out these cool podcasts and videos. Awesome.

Saving Shuttle: here is the text of Rep. Dave Weldon's H.R. 4837, the bill to authorize flying the Space Shuttle from 2010 through 2015 that may have "a daisy's chance on the moon." (Orlando Sentinel; hat tip Space Politics). And Keith notes the gratuitous Russia-bashing in the bill. (Not to mention the swipe at ol' Hugo Chavez.)

NASA FY2008 budget: Jeff Foust summarizes space agency funding in the final appropriations bill.

Japanese space law: Don't miss dispatches from Hiroshi Kiyohara (who is admitted in New York and California and Japan -- great combo), guest blogging at Res Communis on the latest developments, here and here.

Lloyd's on space insurance: (And the obligatory Pat Bahn quote: "Amateurs talk propellants, professionals talk insurance." (Jeff can't resist it either. ;)

The Space Law Show - As I never hesistate to note, David Livingston loves lawyers. Two lawyers appear on The Space Show before the new year bells ring, according to the schedule: Today, Dec 28th, Dr. George Robinson, discussing his recent paper, "Public Space law, the Practitioner, and the Private Entrepreneur"; and on Monday, Dec. 31, Prof. Joanne Gabrynowicz will have a space law review and summary of 2007 developments. A treat for all. As always, the Show offers MP3's of all programs for download. I will certainly grab both for my iPod. (Am I the only one who listens to The Space Show at the gym?)

NASA adspace (meant to post this earlier, but just for the record): Buy it or not, the NASA Innovation Fund and Sponsorship Act, H.R. 4308, introduced by Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH).

ITAR relief? Believe it when we see it.

First big space law event of the new year: The Second International Conference on the State of Remote Sensing Law - Jan. 17-18, 2008, presented, of course, by the University of Mississippi's National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law in lovely Oxford, Mississippi. Register here. (And many more noteworthy events to follow. I'll try to post a roundup of hot dates next week.)

Radio Astronomy deal: The National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) in the United States and the Max-Planck Institute for Radioastronomy (MPIfR) in Germany concluded a Memorandum of Understanding outlining planned collaborative efforts to enhance the capabilities of each other's telescopes and to expand their cooperation in scientific research. Good to hear.

Speaking of cooperation... Outer planet missions: NASA international cooperation with ESA and JAXA. (Leonard David's blog)

Looking ahead: 2008 launches. And Rob Coppinger says '08 is the year progress must be made in space. (Flight International via Spaceports.)

Texas space: In light of news about possible launches from Corpus Christi by Space Access, P.J. Blount looks at space law in the Lone Star State. (Meanwhile, down in Florida, if you are participating in one of those exciting and educational Space Access getaways in January, bring your swimsuit... not your spacesuit. Yet. And why not invite your favorite space lawyer? Welcome back Space Access!)

If you were waiting for Santa to bring us a decision on the proposed XM-Sirius satellite radio merger, no luck. Definitely before next Christmas. Well we hope. Meanwhile, FCC was busy easing the 32-year-old ban on a company owning both a newspaper and a TV or radio station in the same city. And, you know, other stuff. (And yes, XM got booted off the Nasdaq-100. Ouch. At least Sirius hangs in there.)

Speaking of mergers, you may not have heard it here first but the era of large satellite mergers is over.

I want my SpaceX IPO.

Not a space property dispute, but: That little controversy over a bit of Earth land ended last week when ISRO agreed to accept 70 acres allotted to it by the Kerala government to set up the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology.

Rocket club law: Dick Stafford has an update on club-based permits. Flying 'em should be the tricky part.

Carnival fever: I'm catching up with space carnys #32, #33, and #34... (As Robot Guy reported in #32, A Babe in the Universe was in NYC at the planetarium right in my 'hood, and took pictures. Just as well she did not visit me -- aka A Space Law Babe in the Universe -- because although I finally understand the rule against perpetuities, I'm still working on her famous GM=tc^3 equation. One day....)

Betting on the Google Lunar X Prize: This blog is not Space Wager Probe but I will note that yes you can speculate on Intrade whether the Google Moon contest will be won by 2012. (It's the only space-related item currently posted; find it under "Current Events" in the Prediction Markets menu.) (That is, if the presidential election is not interesting enough.) Let the Google Moon prize games begin..

Maybe it is only human to fall in love with robots. (As long as they're not space lawyer robots?)

No vehicle without a driver may exceed 60 miles per hour: And other strange state traffic laws... Right. We're sticking to space law.

By the way, the world's oldest practicing lawyer who finally died this year at 103 was not a space lawyer. (Of course, there's no saying whether practicing space law might have extended his life even more. However, he might have had more fun.)

Speaking of which, the lawyer who died this month allegedly from work-related stress was also not a space lawyer.

Let the countdown to 2008 begin. ;)

Cheers!

* * *
IMAGE: NASA - cluster of stars known as NGC 2264, the "Snowflake cluster" in the cone Nebula. Beautiful.

Space seasons greeting

2007-12-24T23:44:00.000-08:00

(To think there were no blogs back then on which to post this...:)

As we recall every year, in response to the Christmas message from Apollo 8 (MP3) beamed to the planet by astronauts Frank Borman, James A. Lovell, Jr., and William A. Anders, as they orbited the moon in 1968 (reading from Genesis), Houston sent this reply:

Twas the night before Christmas and way out in space,
the Apollo 8 crew had just won the moon race.
The headsets were hung by the consoles with care,
in hopes that Chris Kraft soon would be there.

Frank Borman was nestled all snug in his bed,
while visions of REFSMMAT's danced in his head;
and Jim Lovell, in his couch, and Anders, in the bay,
were racking their brains over a computer display.

When out of the DSKY, there arose such a clatter,
Frank sprang from his bed to see what was the matter.
Away to the sextant he flew like a flash,
to make sure they weren't going to crash.

The light on the breast of the moon's jagged crust
gave a luster of green cheeses to the gray lunar dust.
When what to his wondering eyes should appear,
but a Burma Shave sign saying 'Kilroy was here.'

(Laughter)

But Frank was no fool. He knew pretty quick
that they had been first; this must be a trick.
More rapid than rockets, his curses they came.
He turned to his crewmen and called them by name.

Now Lovell, now Anders, now don't think I'd fall
for an old joke you've written up the wall.
They spoke not a word, but grinning like elves,
and laughed at their joke in spite of themselves.

Frank sprang to his couch, to the ship gave a thrust,
and away they all flew past the gray lunar dust.
But we heard them explain ere they flew around the moon:
'Merry Christmas to earth; we will be back there real soon.'

***
Joys of the season from Space Law Probe! ;)

--------------
UPDATE: Just caught up with Clark's post from yesterday, Remembering Apollo 8, in which he links to Rob Coppinger's post on the Christmas Eve broadcast, along with a lovely poem by Major Michael A. Titre via Chair Force Engineer ("...With crew aboard and countdown done, Her engines roar in unison, Man's greatest venture has begun....") Yes.

Black Holes and space law consulting

2007-12-20T10:15:00.000-08:00

Along with all the buzz about Professor Frans von der Dunk joining the faculty of the University of Nebraska's new space law program, we've also been hearing talk about the private space law consultancy company with the cool name Frans recently launched. So I sent a note to the professor asking if he would tell us a bit about, that's right, Black Holes.

To which Frans graciously e-mailed (and I've added links, musical and other):

"Of course. I established Black Holes B.V., my consultancy company in 2007 in order to accommodate the growing need for professional advise on international legal, policy and political aspects of outer space activities and their applications here down on Earth in the broadest sense of the word. It just sort of coincided with my recent move from the Leiden, Netherlands, based International Institute of Air and Space Law to the position of Professor of Space Law at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln for the purpose of the Space and telecoms programme which will be offered as per the academic year 2008-2009.

As for the consultancy company, I experienced that far too often in the context of major technologically-, operationally-, financially- or politically-driven space or space application programmes and projects far too little attention - or even none at all - was paid at the outset to outlining and analyzing the applicable legal, regulatory, institutional, policy and political framework. Such original omissions then turn out to work like black holes, sucking up unnecessary hours, efforts and resources, and I made it the mission of Black Holes precisely to provide timely professional advise and tailor-made tutorials, connecting the legal parameters and ramifications in a no-nonsense manner to the broader policy, political, economic, commercial, operational and technical aspects of any space activity or application, thereby allowing clients to avoid such black holes."

Great concept. We all know that familiar black holes feeling. As Frans said, "To be honest, the name of the company was also inspired by a lyric from the epic song Shine On You Crazy Diamond of the rock band Pink Floyd, "Now there's a look in your eyes / Like black holes in the sky", courtesy Roger Waters, stemming from the the seminal 1975 album "Wish You Were Here". Pink Floyd have often been labeled the space rock band par excellence, their career being replete with references to outer space, the sun, the moon and other celestial bodies, including the Earth itself as a planet, in their sound, song titles, album titles and lyrics alike."

That is music to our ears. ;)

The services Black Holes offers clients include:

researching, analysing and evaluating the legal, regulatory, policy and political framework applicable to any space activity or application, and presenting the results thereof by reports and presentations;

conducting legal reality checks of proposed space activities or applications, and commenting on their legal, regulatory, policy and political ramifications, by means of reports and presentations;

providing advise and recommendations on future actions required or desirable to enhance any space activity or application, by means of reports and presentations;

developing, offering and monitoring tailor-made tutorials for professionals on the legal, regulatory, policy and political framework applicable to any space activity or application;

developing, offering and monitoring self-study programmes for professionals on the legal, regulatory, policy and political framework applicable to any space activity or application;

organising meetings and workshops to address legal, regulatory, policy and political aspects of space activities and their applications for selected audiences; and

addressing audiences on legal, regulatory, policy and political aspects of space activities and their applications.

Sounds like a comprehensive package for the space community. And it's about time. Given his wide expertise in international space matters covering the gamut from satellites to space tourism, Frans would be remiss if he did not turn up the volume, as it were, and open a 21st century space law consultancy company.

Good luck, Professor.

Shine on!!

Prospective clients and others, send inquiries, comments, requests, song lyrics, etc., to Frans at frans@black-holes.eu. And now if you'll excuse me, there's a CD I must go download to my iPod....

* * *
IMAGE: I could not resist swiping this from the Black Holes website -- Prof. von der Dunk explaining space law to a delighted-looking Prime Minister Tony Blair. And come to think of it, we have a whole bunch of folks running for US president who could use Black Holes' advice too.

Our kind of market insight

2007-12-19T11:10:00.000-08:00

Heh. UBS's moon market humor is making the rounds. (Now in WaPo and elsewhere, yesterday reported on Simberg's TransMu.)

Yes, intrepid Wall Street analysts graphed an interesting metric: lunar land prices appear to be a "lead indicator of US house prices." (See the actual chart via Financial Times.)

Never mind the sub-prime implosion, apparently lunar real estate prices began 2007 at $16 an acre and hit a high of $22.50. And this uptick for the moon land sector portends good news for beleaguered housing markets on the home planet in 2008.

Naturally, here on SLP we are all bullish on lunar property. And while I can't necessarily explain mysterious Earth-moon market forces that may come into play (gravity and dark matter usually account for much), if you're thinking of selling your house and investing in a stack of moon paper, I can explain why there may still be time to make any number of 2007 Idiot of the Year lists. ;)

Weldon's mission to save the shuttle

2007-12-18T10:37:00.000-08:00

Here is a video of Congressman Dave Weldon (R-FL) yesterday at Kennedy Space Center announcing his proposal to keep the space shuttle flying after 2010.

I have not seen the authorizing bill the representative from Florida’s Space Coast will introduce but he admits right off the pad he does not expect his measure to become law, but rather, says he wants it to spark a national debate over the issue. (But that may not happen either if by national debate he means the presidential candidates suddenly consider space a top campaign issue.)

But politics is local, and so are jobs. Rep. Weldon's constituents of course include thousands of KSC workers who would naturally support the move (surprisingly there's no mention of the bill on the congressman's website as of this morning, where the "Paygo Farce" and Pelosi spending $16 thousand on flowers appear to be top stories; I'll check back).

Hmm. Maybe Weldon should grab his bass guitar and bipartisan congressional rock band the Second Amendments, and go out on tour to ignite support for the shuttle? Here are the Second Amendments playing 20th Anniversary of Farm Aid, and here's the band at the 2007 National Ethanol Conference, and they also amped it up in Iraq to entertain our troops. Why not a Save the Shuttle tour?

We'll always have spaceports

2007-12-17T12:14:00.000-08:00

As we've seen, challenges include issues involving taxation, regulation, licensing, legislation, politics and more; and include the catastrophe of a fatal test accident. But Jeff Foust overviews developments on the spaceport front, from Mojave and New Mexico to Cecil Field and Corpus Christi, including Kiruna, Sweden and beyond, and writes, "It’s clear that many people still see great potential in the emerging NewSpace industry, despite the difficulties some companies have experienced in the last few years. Indeed, like many of the vehicle companies, some spaceports have had to stretch out their timelines, but are making slow and steady progress—enough, it seems, to encourage others not to be left behind." Spaceports still taxiing towards takeoff, The Space Review, Dec. 17th.

(And I still want one in my backyard.)

* * *
IMAGE: Illustration for entrance to Spaceport America.

New SIA chair

2007-12-17T09:56:00.000-08:00

Yes, it may be "old space" but lawyers and satellites go together. SLP congratulates Jennifer A. Manner, vice president of regulatory affairs for Mobile Satellite Ventures and adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center and American University’s Washington College of Law who was elected by the Satellite Industry Association (SIA) to serve as its 2008 chairman.

(The departing chair, Nancy Eskenazi, vice president and associate general counsel of SES Americom, is also a lawyer.)

No spaceport district, no tax

2007-12-13T14:19:00.000-08:00

No kidding. The spaceport sales tax the voters of Doña Ana County approved by referendum in April, to have commenced Jan. 1, 2008, must now go uncollected. As New Mexico Attorney General Gary King opined in a letter this week responding to a bit of understandable confusion, "the county regional spaceport gross receipts tax may not be imposed, collected or enforced absent the formation of a regional spaceport district to which the proceeds of the tax can be allocated."

But no worries, spaceport tax supporters -- the AG wrote: "Because the County enacted the tax prematurely under the law, we conclude that the Taxation and Revenue Department may properly defer enactment of the tax until a district is created." That is, of course, under the Regional Spaceport District Act.

What a country. Think of all the folks who would rather not pay new taxes but must. For some New Mexicans, it is ironic that the tax collector cannot take yes for an answer.

Space project seeks Texas lawyer

2007-12-12T15:19:00.000-08:00

An SLP reader sends the following for posting:
*****

My name is Christopher Carson, and I am the instigator of the Luna Project, an effort to send humans to live on the Moon, as soon as 2012.

Study of the issues has convinced me that this goal can be achieved with existing technologies, through direct support from the space-minded public, and will greatly contribute to practically any future space activity or application.

I hope to see this adopted as an activity by existing space advocacy groups, and carried into practice without adding too much additional redundancy to a scene cluttered with overlapping groups of small membership. Nevertheless, it appears that some dedicated organization is required, particularly at this early phase.

Accordingly, I am looking for a lawyer in the North Texas area to advise me on related legal matters -- specifically concerning the uses of the different classes of non-profit corporation, and the mechanics of their formation and maintenance. With any luck, I will find a lawyer who is not only experienced in this area, but also in sympathy with my proposal (less because he or she might be inclined to make allowances as regards to fees, than for the sake of the more helpful quality of the advice I could expect).

My sincere thanks.

*****
Good luck, Christopher!

Old and new space law practice

2007-12-11T11:55:00.000-08:00

While the Wall Street Journal's otherwise knowledgeable Law Blog still asks, What the heck is space law?, The National Law Journal, inspired by among other things, this year's series of space investment summits, weighs in this week with the news Space-related practices have lift-off (sub. required; although there's also a 30-day free trial but no worries, I borrowed a copy of the article for our edification; links to law firms added).

OK, satellite business at top law firms is not exactly news, as Milbank Tweed partner Peter Nesgos (or Del Smith at Jones Day, or other telecom and satellite law gurus) can attest. But legal representation of space start-ups and space tourism related ventures is new, and it's the emerging focus that will shape new space law practice, as Rosanna Sattler of Posternak who includes in her client list Orbital Outfitters, already knows. (Of course space tourism is noted at the end of the piece, but that's because I didn't write it).

Here is the article; and thanks for the heads up from Bob Ambrogi (cohort of mine from the bad ol' days of American Lawyer Media in the 1990's... don't ask. And when you finish the story zip over to Bob's famous LawSites.)

--------------------------------------------------------
The National Law Journal
Dec. 10, 2007

As investors and entrepreneurs convene this month for this year's third space investment summit, lawyers from a variety of firms say their space-related practices are taking off.

Firms with lawyers or a group dedicated to space or satellite work say increased private-equity investment is a major factor fueling the sector.

Other industry dynamics include the development of cellphones and other devices that can offer video and Internet connections, which require more satellite usage, and entrepreneurs pursuing space tourism ventures.

Private equity's discovery of the satellite industry in the past four or five years had ramped up White & Case's transactional work, said Maury Mechanick, a counsel to the firm's Washington office. "It's been a darling of the private-equity industry," Mechanick said.

About eight to 10 lawyers in the firm's telecommunications, media and technology practice group spend most of their time on space-related business. Most are transactional lawyers, but some have regulatory expertise, he said.

Other firms with a foothold in the sector run the gamut from national firms such as Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker and New York's Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy to regional firms Dickstein Shapiro and Leventhal Senter & Lerman of Washington, Posternak, Blankstein & Lund of Boston, and Townsend and Townsend and Crew of San Francisco.

Growth in orbit

Lawyers are following the upward trajectory of the satellite sector. World satellite industry revenues grew by 65% between 2001 and 2006 to $106.1 billion. On the ground side of the business, operators of commercial teleport facilities and equipment — which send and receive satellite signals — are expected to collect about $15 billion in revenue this year, up 17% from 2004, according to an October report by New York-based World Teleport Association. Three investment summits sponsored by a variety of trade groups and nonprofits have been held around the country this year, including one in San Jose, Calif., this month.

Private-equity investors' huge interest in the sector has also expanded Milbank Tweed's deal work during the past few years, said New York partner Peter Nesgos. Milbank recently represented financial institutions that funded Loral Space & Communications Inc.'s $3.25 billion acquisition of Telesat Canada, a deal that closed in late October.

Canadian satellite company Infosat Communications Inc. has also been a client for years, "through quite a bit of financing and internal organization," Nesgos said.

Once companies have financing in place or finish a mergers and acquisitions deal, Milbank assists with ongoing licensing and regulatory work, contract negotiation and insurance work. Bringing in other legal disciplines has boosted the firm's activity in the sector, Nesgos said.

Six Milbank lawyers are dedicated to its space practice, with 20 other corporate, finance and litigation lawyers spending some time on work for the industry.

"Where we've seen the growth is providing a broader range of legal services to our client base," Nesgos said. "That's been our success."

Intellectual property firm Townsend is angling for more space-related business by providing legal advice and funding to new space trade group The Eighth Continent Project. Golden, Colo.-based Eighth Continent, which helps space-related startups find financing and business partners, launched in August, and Townsend announced its involvement last month.

Townsend's current clients include satellite companies and inventors of products useful in space commerce, and it hopes to connect them with other companies for joint business opportunities through Eighth Continent, said Denver associate Gene Branch.

"Townsend stands ready to assist all members of the Eighth Continent Project to protect intellectual property created for this rapidly expanding market." Branch said.

Space tourism

Posternak's Rosanna Sattler, who is also the chair of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Space Enterprise Council, said the nascent space tourism industry is boosting the firm's space-related business. Posternak's clients include Los Angeles- and Washington-based Orbital Outfitters Inc., a year-old company that makes civilian space suits.

Posternak's space law team also includes a corporate lawyer and an international trade lawyer who specializes in helping space industry companies navigate international regulatory issues.

"The hope is the demand for tourism will result in a number of different kinds of rockets that will be able to launch on demand," Sattler said.

* * *
IMAGE: Peter Nesgos of Milbank; Rosanna Sattler of Posternak.

Zero G, Zero Tax in Virginia

2007-12-10T09:20:00.000-08:00

Virginia is at it again, moving forward with proposed ground-breaking new space law designed to boost commercial space industry. And what better way to encourage business than new tax breaks and incentives. As my pal Jack Kennedy reports over on Spaceports blog, Virginia's Zero G, Zero Tax proposal is on the agenda for endorsement today by the Virginia Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOTS).

In a nutshell, the proposed bill, would "exempt state taxation on gross income earned from commercial spaceflight launches from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport and income gained from spaceflight training activities from a Virginia airport or spaceport."

Here are the provisions (see bluelining on pages 7 and 22-23), (and yes some of the language initially appeared in an earlier draft of the historic Virginia Spaceflight Liability and Immunity Act which became law July 1 of this year):

33. For taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2009, any gain recognized from the sale of launch services to space flight participants, as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 70102, or launch services intended to provide individuals the training or experience of a launch, without performing an actual launch. To qualify for a deduction under this subdivision, launch services must be performed in Virginia or originate from an airport or spaceport in Virginia.

34. For taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2009, any gain recognized as a result of 169 resupply services contracts for delivering payload, as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 70102, entered into with the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services division of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or other space flight entity, as defined in § 8.01-227.8, and launched from an airport or spaceport in Virginia.

22. For taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2009, any gain recognized from the sale of launch services to space flight participants, as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 70102, or launch services intended to provide individuals the training or experience of a launch, without performing an actual launch. To qualify for a deduction under this subdivision, launch services must be performed in Virginia or originate from an airport or spaceport in Virginia.

23. For taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2009, any gain recognized as a result of resupply services contracts for delivering payload, as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 70102, entered into with the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services division of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or other space flight entity, as defined in § 8.01-227.8, and launched from an airport or spaceport in Virginia.

Another first of its kind piece of state space legislation.

Jack notes lawmakers who have agreed to back the proposal include House of Delegates democratic and republican caucus chairs, members of the House Finance Committee, as well as folks on the Virginia Aerospace Advisory Council. Going forward he says the bill is expected to be refered to the House Finance Committee for a hearing and an initial vote in late January. Thanks, Jack. And we will certainly continue to keep an eye on far-sighted pro-space lawmaking over in the Commonwealth.

Mojave report corrected

2007-12-07T14:50:00.000-08:00

Leave it to Professor Reynolds:
---------------------------
MOJAVE SPACEPORT UPDATE: Earlier I noted a report noted by Rand Simberg and several other space bloggers that the Mojave Space Port was in danger of closure by the FAA. I also emailed Patricia Smith, the FAA's Associate Adminstrator for Commercial Space Transportation. She responds: "The report is totally inaccurate."

I'm very happy to hear that, and very grateful for the swift reply.
---------------------------
We are too. Thanks, Glenn.

UPDATE: I agree with Rand, at this time "a more expansive, and clarifying response" is in order. He quite reasonably asks, "What, if anything, is going on?" Indeed. Patti? Stu? More info please.

Civil space policy and the "Spunik moment"

2007-12-07T14:02:00.000-08:00

Here is a nice little 30-pager of a stocking stuffer for that civil space policy lover on your holiday shopping list (and who doesn't fit that description?): U.S. Civilian Space Policy Priorities: Reflections 50 Years After Sputnik (Dec. 3, 2007). From the festive folks at Congressional Research Service, who else?

I am not sure how much of this is at all revelatory, especially after all the nonstop Sputnik 50th anniversary reflection this year, but basically, CRS overviews:

No Sputnik moment, Cold War, or space race exists to help policymakers clarify the goals of the nation’s civilian space program. The Hubble telescope, Challenger and Columbia space shuttle disasters, and Mars exploration rovers frame the experience of current generations, in contrast to the Sputnik launch and the U.S. Moon landings that form the experience of older generations. As a result, some experts have called for new 21st century space policy objectives and priorities to replace those developed 50 years ago.

A Sputnik moment of course, is "a rapid national response that quickly mobilizes major policy change as opposed to a response of inaction or incremental policy change. The term is also used to question inaction — as in whether or not the nation is prepared to respond to a challenge without an initiating Sputnik moment."

Well? Bring it on.

* * *
UPDATE: Here is a quick summary of the report, from Aviation Week. (Link via NASA Watch.) I am now ready for an eggnog moment.

Mojave Spaceport Under FAA Scrutiny

2007-12-06T12:14:00.000-08:00

Following the fatal accident at Mojave Air and Space Port in July, a big question on the regulatory side was what if anything, would FAA/AST do?

Less than a week after the tragic explosion during a test at Mojave that took the lives of three and seriously injured three other Scaled Composites workers, FAA/AST chief Patti Smith told Space News her office would defer to state authorities including California Occupational Safety and Health Administration investigating the accident who, she said, "indicate this was an industrial accident, a fuel-flow test gone terribly wrong."

Smith said: "It was not a launch accident. It was not a flight accident. It was not directly related to vehicle performance or passenger involvement."

But now her office wants more information from the spaceport. And Mojave's license, issued by FAA June 17, 2004, may be in jeopardy. Here is Leonard David's blog report:

Looks like a battle brewing over future use of the Mojave Spaceport, home site for development of the suborbital SpaceShipTwo and other private space ventures.

According to Bill Deaver, editor/publisher of the Mojave Desert News, an above the fold story in his paper [full text not available online --JL] is reporting that Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) bureaucracy threatens the Mojave Air and Space Port.

At the heart of the issue are requests for information apparently due to two explosions at the airport earlier this year. One of those involved propulsion/fueling equipment for the SpaceShipTwo program under development by Scaled Composites. That accident in July claimed the lives of workers on the project.

The newspaper reports that Stuart Witt, General Manager of the Mojave Air and Space Port, has stated the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) has threatened to suspend or revoke their spaceport license.

AST officials want information on fuels to be used in space vehicles currently under development at the spaceport, along with information on how far away the materials must be stored from other airport activities.

Another AST demand, the newspaper also reports, centered on how local space operations would comply with national fire code rules. However, according to Witt, the newspaper states, information on fuels is not available as rocket groups at the spaceport are not that far along on their current design and development process.

“I think it’s time for us to make a trip to Washington to meet with members of Congress,” the newspaper quotes Witt as saying.

Sure to be more coming in the days to come on this spaceport situation.

It's not clear what Congress might be expected to do for the spaceport. Given AST's well-earned rep for being uncompromising on public safety while, in equal measure, fair and supportive with the young an growing industry it oversees, there should be some hope for a positive outcome.

Euro space station law

2007-12-05T11:32:00.000-08:00

As NASA prepares for liftoff of STS-122 scheduled for tomorrow, Dec 6th, the mission to deliver the European Space Agency's Columbus Laboratory to the International Space Station, Jeremy Hsu has a good overview of law on the 4.5-metre diameter cylindrical lab now tucked into cargo bay of the Space Shuttle Atlantis that is to be Europe's "biggest single contribution" to the ISS: Europe Lays Down the Law for New Space Lab. (Space.com)

Take a quick read. After all, legal issues are bound to come up during 10-year projected lifespan of Columbus. Prof. Frans von der Dunk (who wrote the 2006 book, The International Space Station Commercial Utilisation from a European Legal Perspective) and others explain the simple Columbus lab legal basics of criminal jurisdiction, civil liability and intellectual property.

And review the general legal framework for the International Space Station.

By the way, ESA has a new Columbus Blog, posting reports on delivery of Columbus lab and throughout the mission.

And of course, NASA's hot new webstation has all the latest on the mission.

Godspeed Atlantis and Columbus.

Just say no humans

2007-12-04T10:45:00.000-08:00

Want to really ban humans from Mars? In response to the anti-human provision in NASA funding bill HR 3093 ("Provided, That none of the funds under this heading shall be used for any research, development, or demonstration activities related exclusively to the human exploration of Mars...."), Michael Huang, for one, has some advice: "If the anti-human-spaceflight community is serious about eliminating humans in space, it should write a better law. And no messing around this time:

Provided, That no funds shall be used for anything that has, does or will directly result in humans, human-derived beings or human-like objects existing at an altitude higher than 100 kilometers above sea level on planet Earth."

Short of that, Michael, thinking like a pro-human space lawyer, suggests some clever ways to beat the ban of humans on Mars, should it become law (The Space Review).

(And of course, human space explorers funded by, for example, China, or other nations, as well as non-NASA funded humans from the US and anywhere else, would remian free to go.)

Meanwhile, I warn Michael, he's gonna get a lot of e-mail on this from some seriously irate robots.

* * *
IMAGE: Courtesy Firstscience.com.

Coming Storm

2007-12-04T09:56:00.000-08:00

To our collection of holiday party dates and invitations, it's not too early too add, from ProSpace, the "citizens' space lobby dedicated to opening the space frontier," the 2008 March Storm Invitation.

Congress is expecting us.

------------------
Quoting ProSpace quoting Margaret Mead: Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

The V-Prize Vision

2007-12-03T13:50:00.000-08:00

"V" is for Virginia. And Virginia is for space. Tune in to the Virginia Report, hosted by member of the Virginia House of Delegates, Ken Plum (36th District), for the videocast, Challenge to the Commercial Space Community, (approx. 28 minutes) featuring Washington, D.C. space and tech lawyer Jim Dunstan of Garvey Schubert Barer, along with Virginia "Teacher in Space" Megan Seals discussing newspace and the V-Prize. modeled after the Orteig Prize won by Charles Lindbergh and the Ansari X Prize won by Burt Rutan, this time the challenge is point-to-point suborbital spaceflight: "to create a vehicle capable of launching from Virginia and land in Europe in approximately a hour."

Jim and Megan confirm the V-Prize rules will be released by late 2008. Jim notes that the long lead time item will be negotiations with foreign governments. "You can't announce the prize until you announce the destination." And Jim specifies the rules will be written as flexibly as possible "to let the genius that's out there flourish."

Jim noted that unlike the X-Prize, for which the entrants were all start-ups, V-Prize has received interest not just from start-ups but established aerospace companies who are thinking in an entrepreneurial fashion.

Customers of the technology are expected to include, for example, FedEx and the US military.

What puts the state of Virginia ahead of the commercial space curve? For one thing, they've got Wallops Island. And Jim notes, of course, Virginia's groundbreaking Spaceflight Liability and Immunity Act calling it part of the equation for turning Virgina into "a gateway for a spacefaring nation."

Lots more to come from the space Commonwealth. Stay tuned for V-Prize updates and other developments via Virginia space lawyer Jack Kennedy's Spaceports blog; and for a bit more background, see The V-Prize: one hour to Europe The Space Review, Aug. 27, 2007.

Friday Flybys - 11.30.07

2007-11-30T16:21:00.000-08:00

First, SLP joins folks around the globe including everybody here in blogspace in congratulating CNSA and the people of China on the success of the lunar probe Chang'e I. And thanks for the lovely Moon image.

祝贺 ;)

Now, in typically random fashion, the Flybys (and on an actual Friday, yet ... what is getting into this blog?)

GAO Space: Yes, for GAO report mavens (and who among us is not one?) here is the prosaically titled, NASA Agency Has Taken Steps Toward Making Sound Investment Decisions for Ares I but Still Faces Challenging Knowledge Gaps, dig in. (GAO-08-51 Oct. 2007.) Or you can read this comment on Hobbyspace. And here is House Science and Technology Committee chairman Bart Gordon's (D-TN) reaction to the "mix of good news and not-so-good news." (Hat tip: NASA Watch)

COMSTAC minutes: The Oct 11th meeting, in which Deputy Secretary of Transportation Thomas J. Barrett said "commercial space transportation generates $100 billion of economic activity and supports half a million jobs." Wow. (Unfortunately he offered no estimate regarding what portion of all this may go to space lawyers.)

This blog is not Space Medicine Probe: But an interesting item (among a bunch of other interesting stuff) from the above-mentioned meeting minutes -- George Nield noted AST will be signing a Memorandum of Cooperation with FAA Office of Aerospace Medicine, which has been helping AST with medical safety issues and training. An astro-apple a day...

Google NASA: Two years after signing a memorandum of understanding, followed by a Space Act Agreement, SF Gate has an update on the collaboration between Earth's biggest space agency and, you know, that nice little company we've all seen here and there on the Internet.

Launch talk: If you missed Satellite TODAY's showcase of interviews with executives of a top launch service providers, catch up now with Rob Peckham of Sea Launch, Jean-Yves Le Gall of Arianespace, Ken Heinly of Boeing, Frank McKenna of ILS, G Madhavan Nair of ISRO and David Markham of Lockheed Martin -- talking about market issues and more.

Fun with space station law: Don't worry if you missed the Slashdot rockin' discussion on whose law applies on ISS which did generate hundreds of comments, most but not all of which were along the lines of "Space truly is the final frontier [of litigation]" and "when the Borg attack I shall use lawyers as my shield." Really.

Space radio deal follies: Washington Post slams NAB for submitting thousands of anti-merger e-mails to FCC that may have been generated by pop-up ads. (Not exactly a new tactic: fake citizen lobbying of lawmakers.) There are better ways to contest a merger. Meanwhile, Bear Stearns, for one, is reporting that a DOJ decision on the deal could come by Monday. (Followed of course by FCC's ruling.) Antennas up.

More air than space: From the ABA Forum on Air & Space Law's gathering in Memphis, Tennessee last month, here are the remarks of Jeffrey N. Shane, Department of Transportation Under Secretary for Policy, who begins with some interesting comments about space. But then veers off into...air. (We get that a lot.)

Hot event reminder: The 2nd Eilene M. Galloway Symposium on Critical Issues in Space Law - International Civil Space Cooperation: Obstacles and Opportunities , Dec. 6th, at the Cosmos Club, Washington D.C. (like last year). It's not too late to register. (Or, if you show up at the last minute, bring a NY Mets t-shirt for Joanne and she may let you in ;). Another excellent offering from our friends in Mississippi.

Spaceport at Cecil Field: The Jacksonville Aviation Authority "is about six months away from filing its final piece of paperwork." (Hat tip: HobbySpace.) (And I want a spaceport in my hometown too.)

Owen's satellites: Telecom counsel Owen Kurtin of Dickstein Shapiro has a year-end overview of "satellite industry subsectors and where they are going. (Hi, Owen.)

Shana blogs NASA and Small Business.

Moon musings: Frans G. Von der Dunk's "The Moon Agreement and the Prospect of Commercial Exploitation of Lunar Resources" Annals of Air and Space Law Vol. XXXII (2007) (subscription) (Hi, Frans!)

Elect space: Alas, so many lawyers but so few space lawyers running for president. Of course, Mike Huckabee is not the first guy running for high office to suggest putting a lawyer on the first rocket to Mars. I leave it to other bloggers to analyse the space policy and spending plans (no to mention other positions) of the candidates. (I'll try restraint.) Meanwhile, Slate's Emily Bazelon reports on the lawyers who are advising the lawyer-candidates. That's right, none of the legal advisers are space lawyers either. (Hat tip: Carolyn Elefant.)

Entrepreneurship 101: Rocky Persaud, Chair of the Canadian Space Commerce Association, says space startups need a business accelerator. (The Space Review, Nov 26, 2007.) And I would add, good legal advice, too.

Speaking of entrepreneurship, SLP concurs -- no better role model than this guy: Elon Musk is Entrepreneur of the Year. (And Auntie Jesse says, big congrats to the father of triplets!)

Biggest law firm in the US: Surprise, it's DLA Piper, topping the 2007 NLJ chart (sub. req'd.) with 3,623 attorneys, edging past Baker & McKenzie which was the number one biggest firm (that's in in number of lawyers, not necessarily revenues or profits) for almost 30 years. But do they do space law? Yup.

Congratulations to Tanja Masson-Zwaan on becoming president of the International Institute of Space Law (as of Jan. 1, 2008)! Looking forward to lots more great things, as always, from IISL.

COTS second round: SPACEHAB and t/space. (Hat tips: Clark Lindsey.)

Speaking of COTS, this blog is not Space War Probe: But the third quarter issue of MilsatMagazine focuses on COTS business.

Newspace and the "Netscape moment": Leonard David overviews things (Space News).

V-Prize visions: Zip over to lawyer and great guy Jack Kennedy's Spaceports, for v-cool news on the V-Prize challenge. Much more on all this v-biz to come.

HSPD-12 litigation update: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments Dec. 5th on the injunction "in the case of 28 Caltech employees at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who filed suit to prevent unreasonable personal background checks." Briefs and responses here. Really, NASA. How about checking into the background of the universe instead.

Galileo deal: Jeff Foust has an update.

Space Investment Summit 3, Dec. 5-6, 2007 in San Jose, CA. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.

Big Mr. B: Air & Space's profile of Robert Bigelow includes some insights into the company's dealings with NASA in connection with the licensing of Transhab technology. Mike Gold, Bigelow’s corporate counsel in Washington said NASA had been "resistant to private sector development," and more cooperative during the transfer process. Now, Mike says, NASA's relations with Bigelow are "excellent." Also metioned are Bigelow's own patents. Dig in.

Gerry Oberst of Hogan & Hartson on Protecting C-Band Satellite Operations.

LOST in space: I did not know about this but an astute SLP reader (and aren't they all?) sends over a link to this NSS White Paper: Rejecting the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST) (Oct 2007). Their position: "The National Space Society believes that the United States should reject the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, also known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST). We believe that the Senate should not ratify LoST because it subjects the U.S. and other nations to unnecessary and counterproductive international authority; sets a bad precedent for signing other, more restrictive “common heritage of mankind” treaties; inhibits the future development of space resources; and is in fact unnecessary since the U.S. already complies with the portions of the Treaty that do NOT inhibit resource development." (Thanks, Reginald.)

Whose our blog daddy? Yes, a space law professor who also wrote the top selling space law book on Amazon (among only a few zillion other things) is the world's best individual blogger. But only in his spare time. (And yes he reads Space Law Probe.)

Trivia: What is the ringtone on Bob Bigelow's cell phone? (You can ask Mike Gold, but according to Air & Space, it's Yippie-yi-yo, Yippie-yi-yay, the chorus from the 'cowboy ballad' Ghostriders in the Sky.)

Finally, the joke about "a blood-sucking mosquito lawyer" in Bee Movie, (as referenced today by brave Peter Lattman in the WSJ's Law Blog) is not about space lawyer.

That's it. Enjoy this Hubble holiday image of the nearby spiral galaxy M74 "resembling festive lights on a holiday wreath." (Via Alan Boyle at Cosmic Log.)

And have a probing weekend.

* * *
IMAGE: In honor of Elon Musk, I had to pull out this great shot of Falcon in front of FAA in Washington. Love it. (But hey SpaceX, SLP supports whatever you guys do, just don't try to park that thing in front of my building on 78th Street in Manhattan.)

Luncheon with Patti Grace Smith

2007-11-29T09:04:00.000-08:00

Pull up a chair at the Washington Space Business Roundtable lunch on Thursday, Dec. 6th as the always appetizing and nourishing FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, Patti Grace Smith, fills our space plates with her enriching insights on the tantalizing topic, Future of Commercial Space. Yum.

That's at The University Club, University Hall, 1135 16th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. Here is your invitation and reservation form.

* * *
Also on the lunch menu at WSBR -- which of course is the "leadership forum for the promotion of commercial space business and education" -- this Friday, Nov 30th, Jean-Yves Le Gall Chairman & CEO of Arianespace will be chewing on the topic From Sputnik to High Def. And coming January 24th, Robert Peckham, President and General Manager of Sea Launch will do lunch, topic to be arranged. Also, on Feb. 26th the WSBR "flagship lunch and silent auction" will feature Hamadoun Toure, Director General of ITU.

Loosen your belt a few notches. (And who needs dessert?)

"Law or war"

2007-11-28T12:47:00.000-08:00

As the ice melts, simmering international tensions over the frostbitten Artic heat up.

This week in Wired, journalist Richard Morgan worries that "what has gone unnoticed amid the international clamor is that the Arctic battle has implications that reach far beyond the top of Earth." Unnoticed? Not by space lawyers.

Just ask the ever-quotable Prof. Joanne Gabrynowicz of the University of Mississippi her views on Earthly dealings over the frozen far north as precedent for addressing future claims to resources and land on the Moon. She instructs: "The recent Arctic events are relevant. The seabed, high seas, Antarctica, and space are, as a matter of law, global commons. What happens in one can be argued to be legal precedent in the others."

And Joanne adds, "As I tell my students, when humans have a conflict there are only two options: to reach agreement or to fight. Even agreeing to disagree or doing nothing simply puts these options further into the future; it does not create additional options. At the level of nations, these options are law or war."

We'll take more law any day.

* * *
IMAGE: NASA

Sundahl on The Space Show

2007-11-27T07:02:00.000-08:00

That's right, another space lawyer lights up The Space Show. If you missed last Monday's edition of the Show (Nov. 19, 2007) featuring the illustrious Dr. Mark Sundahl talking about, you guessed it, UNIDROIT and the Space Assets Protocol to the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment, along with of course other juicy topics in space law, no worries, you can listen now.

And you can talk with Mark about the Space Assets Protocol anytime, just drop him a note. Tangentially, if you also want to chat a bit about, say, the minutiae of ancient Greek legal history (and who doesn't?), let him know, he's an expert on all that too.

(And yes, Dr. David Livingston will continue to have members of the legal profession appear on his popular program, if only to fan the rumors, which I may have personally started, that our gracious multimedia Space Show host likes lawyers.)

Space law papers wanted

2007-11-26T20:50:00.000-08:00

Glad they're asking. The International Academy for Astronautics is calling for "outstanding papers" to be presented during the Symposium on Private Manned Access to Space, May 28-30, 2008 in Arachon, France.

The symposium will cover inter alia, "the legal and regulatory aspects on both certification and safety aspects of commercial manned space flight; current limitations will be identified and future actions will be proposed..." and yes, this will include orbital and sub-orbital flights.

Deadline for abstracts is Dec 5.

(Hat tip: Personal Spaceflight blog.)

And while you are keyboarding your latest legal opus, the 59th International Astronautical Congress (IAC 2008), coming in September to Glasgow, Scotland, also wants your space law scholarship. Here is the IAC call for abstracts, which includes information about submitting papers for the 51st IISL Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, planning at Glasgow to mark the 40th anniversary of the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (Rescue Agreement) which indeed entered into force December 1968 -- so why not a paper on "the legal aspects of applying the Agreement to international cooperative mission profiles"? Or, if you prefer, a paper on the legal aspects of near Earth objects (NEO’s)? Or perhaps some wisdom on private international law regarding space activities? Go for it. Deadline for abstracts is March 11, 2008.

(By the way, here are IISL's rules for qualifing to be considered for the Dr. I.H. Ph. Diederiks-Verschoor Award for Best Paper of the colloquium, which includes a medal and 500 Euros. And bragging rights on SLP. ;)

* * *

If my doctor told me I had only six minutes to live, I wouldn't brood. I'd type a little faster.
~ Isaac Asimov

Satellite radio merger game

2007-11-19T07:05:00.000-08:00

Apart from all the Thanksgiving holiday festivities this week, what can we do while awaiting the decision on the proposed XM-Sirius merger?

Hmm. How about a satellite radio merger crossword puzzle?

(This blog is not Antitrust Law Probe, but here on SLP we've seen proposed mergers come and go, and this just might be the first deal to inspire its own crossword puzzle. And why didn't we have this during the ULA saga? Twittling our thumbs during the days when the biggest ULA update was this "News flash: There has been no new unsubstantiated rumor in connection with United Launch Alliance (ULA), the proposed Boeing Lockheed EELV merger, in approximately 48 hours. That's right, in an astonishing development this week, almost two days have now passed since the surfacing of unverified, retracted, variably incorrect or otherwise fact-free reports that the deal has won FTC approval....)

Here are the clues to the puzzle above.

Yes, a few of the items might be construed as semi law-related. (No worries, indepth knowledge of the Sherman or Clayton Acts is unnecessary.)

Some answers may or may not be found in the documents, filings, comments and other materials posted on the FCC's XM-Sirius transaction page.

And here are some random obvious answers: Howard Stern, NAB, terrestrial, family friendly, FCC, Circuit City, iPod, Howard Stern, Clear Channel, Howard Stern. Just put 'em in wherever they fit.

Another hint: the answer to 25 across is not Space Law Probe.

Have fun. Listen to space radio while you play.

Meanwhile, as we heard, in a interesting development earlier this month, FCC sent questionnaires to Sirius and XM seeking yet more information (apparently earlier responsive filings, some of which which Mel Karamzin estimated cost his company $1 million in photocopying alone, proved insufficiently revealing for the regulators). Friday was the deadline for responding. And does this latest action by the Commission indicate approval of the deal is more likely? Less likely? Depends on who you ask. I will refrain from linking to any of the miriad of statements, rumors, reports, etc., but suffice to note many industry watchers in recent months predicted the deal would close by year end. Not so fast.

Also on Friday, FCC issued a Second Protective Order to further safeguard the companies' "highly confidential and competitively sensitive documents."

And in a big development, in a recent interview, former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt, who oversaw the formulation of satellite radio rules and the granting of licenses to XM and Sirius, spoke out in support of the proposed merger and called it "pro-competitive."

The waiting game continues.

* * *

(Hat tip and soundtrack: Orbitcast.)

(Oops, almost forget: Check answers here.)

Date with FAA

2007-11-18T00:04:00.000-08:00

An announcement/invite from our friendly space regulators at FAA/AST:

Save the Date – 11th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference: "Roadmap to 2015", February 5-6, 2008, Doubletree Hotel, Crystal City, Virginia.

Agenda and other conference info to follow. As always, this is an excellent annual event hosted by associate administrator Smith and her crew. Be there or be grounded. (Not really. But go. Even if you have to take an ol' airplane.)

Space Protocol needs industry support

2007-11-12T07:17:00.000-08:00

What's happening with the draft Space Assets Protocol?

Professor Mark Sundahl, who, as we know from our blogspace interactive experiment in international treaty-drafting, among other things, is a member of the UNIDROIT working group charged with drafting the Space Assets Protocol to the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment, sends SLP the following quick update.
-------------------------------

Work on the Space Assets Protocol to the UNIDROIT Cape Town Convention has reached a critical juncture. Substantial progress has been made to refine the technical aspects of the protocol, such as its application to components of space assets. However, the project may be delayed if greater support from the space industry does not materialize. The benefits of the protocol to space entrepreneurs and existing companies is clear: the ability to easily create enforceable security interests will reduce the cost of credit and make financing more available. A progressive law of secured transactions is particularly important in the current environment of reduced liquidity since lenders are now looking for greater security.

In light of this, members of the space industry and financial institutions are urged to lend their support to UNIDROIT's efforts and provide their input so that UNIDROIT can move forward with the project and create a legal regime that is most responsive to the needs of the industry. Any comments, questions or expressions of support can be sent me at mark.sundahl@law.csuohio.edu.

----------------------------------------

Mark adds that Sir Roy Goode (who is also writing the commentary to the Rail Protocol, which sounds interesting, too but hey, it ain't space law), is in the process of revising the draft Space Assets Protocol. And yes, UNIDROIT will be issuing a report in the near future detailing status, etc. Stay tuned.

For now, as attention is focused on getting input and building support from industry, tune in to Mark on The Space Show, Nov. 19th for an opportunity to hear more, offer your comments and ask questions. (And say hi to David Livingston, too. ;)

* * *
UPDATE: An SLP reader sends in this related pointer -- the University of Illinois College of Law's Illinois Business Law Journal has an overview, Financing Space Assets and Private Business Entities (Part I) (Oct 22, 2007). Thanks, Marky R!

Spysat snafu

2007-11-12T00:03:00.000-08:00

Of course, this blog is still not Space War Probe, but as the NRO and military experts continue to 'sift through wreckage,' go eyeball Philip Taubman's expose in this week's Sunday New York Times on the ill-fated Future Imagery Architecture program, "perhaps the most spectacular and expensive failure in the 50-year history of American spy satellite projects." What a snafu.

* * *

Meanwhile, on a less dire note, as I've previously reported, there are still enough spy bucks left in the US intelligence coffers to fund NRO Junior, not for kids and would-be espionage professionals only: an unclassified online training facility where anyone, even government spooks and their favorite contractors, can put together a spy satellite -- ok, it's a jigsaw puzzle -- maneuver a spysat through a maze, build a paper plate satellite puppet, play satellite capsule catch, lots more. Perhaps there's hope for our spy-filled future after all.

Unfunded mandate vs. "cosmic extinction"

2007-11-09T18:05:00.000-08:00

On the Hill yesterday it wasn't quite duck and cover during the anticipated hearing on NASA's March 2007 report to Congress on near-Earth objects (NEOs), but as Loretta Hidalgo Whitesides reports, lawmakers "chided NASA yesterday for ignoring the risk of a large rock slamming into earth" and a mandate from Congress.

For NASA's part, Scott Pace told House Science Committee’s space subcommittee, "NASA would be pleased to implement a more aggressive NEO program, if so directed by the President and Congress. However, given the constrained resources and strategic objectives the Agency has already been tasked with, NASA cannot place a new NEO program above current scientific and exploration missions."

Astronaut and champion NEO-buster Rusty Schweickart of the B612 Foundation, who has critiqued NASA's NEO report, testified before the subcommittee about various aspects of NASA's report to Congress (which the agency prepared in response to the NASA Authorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-155)), including NEO tracking, search, discovery, deflection, the Spaceguard Survey, size matters (yes it does) and more. Here is his prepared statement.

Rusty criticised the space agency for failing to recommend a program to meet the 140-meter search goal, but said: "One can sympathize with NASA's fear of the dreaded 'unfunded mandate' from Congress while decrying the Agency's decision to defy the Congressional directive and to delay the initiation of this critical search program."

He wants NASA to produce a supplement to its NEO report "based on new knowledge which has come to light since it began its analysis."

Apart from technical, budgetary and other issues arising from the threat of potentially Earth-shattering NEOs, on the legal side, Rusty said "the single most important question" of the hearing was: "What governance structures should be established to address potential NEO threats?" Good question. He said NEO work at NASA "in an orphaned status" and recommended that Congress make NASA responsible for the "technical development elements of protecting the Earth from NEO impacts as a public safety responsibility."

And beyond technical responsibility? Rusty concluded with the obvious obsevation, that NEO mitigation "is a planetary challenge, not a national one."

But no worries. There's an infinite amount of time to figure this all out and decide what to do next. Or is there.

Meanwhile, thank goodness it's Friday, but not Friday, April 13, 2029, when NEO-trackers say there is a one in 45,000 chance that the small (250-meter) asteroid Apophis could swing by for a little close-up of Earth (and possibly return in 2030).

An yes, we're looking forward to results of the Planetary Society's $50,000 competition to design a mission to rendezvous with a near-Earth asteroid such as Apophis.

(By the way, if you find yourself in NYC, now would be a good time to rocket over to the Hayden Planetarium for the spectacular space show, Cosmic Collisions. And if Rusty is in town I'll be happy to treat him to it.)

* * *
IMAGE: © American Museum of Natural History, "A young Earth is pictured moments after a collision with a Mars-sized wandering planetoid over four billion years ago."

----------------------------------------------------------
We have the ability to make ourselves safe from cosmic extinction.
--R. Schweickart

Blogspace trivia

2007-11-09T16:31:00.000-08:00

Only one of the ten individuals nominated for a coveted 2007 Weblog Award in the category of best individual blogger has actually written a space law text.

Scottish Space Agency?

2007-11-09T16:23:00.000-08:00

Well this will not do at all, as an opinion piece in Scotland's Herald this week laments, "Ask someone to picture a Scottish astronaut and they usually come up with Scotty, scratching his head as he attempts to fix a warp drive with a sonic screwdriver."

With Scotland looking a few years ahead to the launching of its first satellite (that's right, ScotSat-1), a Herald pro-space writer argues Scotland should have its own space agency, or as he put it, "our own wee version of NASA."

And Scottish space entrepreneur Craig Clark believes, "There is a real opportunity now for Scotland to get involved in space industry."

However, as to a government space agency, he concludes, "at the moment, our hands are tied. One of the rules of devolution is Scotland can't have a space programme." (I'm not sure that's a bad thing. After all, when has a national space program ever gotten in the way of space ventures?)

TopSat in Disasters Charter

2007-11-08T17:35:00.000-08:00

TopSat, the "dorm-fridge-size" observation satellite designed and built by a consortium of British firms to deliver low cost, high resolution images of Earth -- and which proved cool enough to win Popular Science's 2006 Aviation and Space Grand Award -- will be included in the International Charter: Space and Major Disasters.

Here is the announcement.

The Disasters Charter, as we know, is "a joint initiative by global space agency members to provide emergency response satellite data free of charge to rescue authorities responding to major natural or man-made disasters anywhere in the world."

Since Nov. 1, 2000, the Charter has been activated more than 100 times (last total I read was 140), including for US disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the Southern California fires. The list of the Charter's recent activations reads like a timeline of human catastrophe.

Lots more on the Charter here.

Thanks for your help, TopSat.

* * *
IMAGE: TopSat, launched on a Kosmos 3M rocket from Plesetsk Cosmodrome in Northern Russia into a polar low orbit on Oct. 27, 2005 and declared operational in Dec. 2005.

Sarbanes-Oxley in Space

2007-11-07T18:44:00.000-08:00

Ask space entrepreneurs and industry executives to name their least favorite law. Easy question, and no surprise in light of the nonstop, well-deserved maligning of the export control regulations, and for a multiplicity of reasons -- ITAR would win hands down as the regime folks in this sector (and they're not alone) most strenuously disdain.

But in the post-Enron space age, federal lawmakers have delivered some newfangled and from a business perspective, hard-to-love legislation -- not for space technology companies only.

Take the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745), aka the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 or, if you prefer, Sarbox or SOX.

Some space industry experts see a serious downside to the regulations designed to guard against corporate fraud. Space Daily last week quotes Chris Stott of ManSat who "cautions that the greatest risk to American new space technology firms, 'is not technology, not event government regulations,' often associated with delays and failures in early stage space technology firms, but Sarbanes-Oxley."

According to the article, Stott calls the law "the 'perfect financial storm' and argues that the expensive, and crippling laws are having the unintended effect of driving thousands of early stage companies to list in the United Kingdom on the Alternative Investment Market. He emphatically urges the audience to contact their Legislators to remedy this madness."

Clearly Sarbanes-Oxley and other new regulations have ushered in sweeping changes in the corporate compliance landscape, and as is generally the case, small companies are hardest hit by onerous regulation. Big companies in aerospace, telecom, high tech and other industries of course know what keeps their chief compliance officers up at night, and can usually afford the costs associated with government regulation. (Although they don't much like it either. However, interestingly, as Business Week suggested, businesses may see a silver lining in section 404 compliance actually helping to cut costs. Hmm.)

Not everyone would put reform minded SOX in the same league as big bad ITAR. But in September at IAC 2007 in India, Chris Stott moderated the session, "Enabling the Frontier: Regulatory Challenges to the Utilisation of Space," in which the two regimes got an almost equal attention. Space lawyer and Excalibur Aerospace CEO Art Dula (who likes to call ITAR the "Foreign Technology Development Act,") said of SOX:

"There is a very real opportunity cost inherent in dealing with Sarbanes-Oxley. You simply have to ask yourselves on a risk-reward basis if what you get in terms of better public regulation of your companies is worth the cost to those companies and to the society. It's very much a problem that Congress is going to have to solve."

Here is a videocast of that IAC session, with Chris and Art joined by Christian Salaburger of MDA Space Missions, Clayton Mowry of Arianespace, John Purvis, general counsel of SES Luxembourg, and Prof. Frans Von Der Dunk of the International Institute of Air and Space Law at Leiden University.

And if you're looking for SOX materials -- rulemaking, reports, studies, proposals, FAQ's, more (hey, we're going to need 'em), SEC has a warehouse full. And if you need a corporate space lawyer (and who doesn't?) as always, SLP has referrals.

* * *

IMAGE: Slide courtesy of the U.S. Government Accountability Office

Tuesday treks - 11.6.07

2007-11-06T13:45:00.000-08:00

(Not quite as transcendently cool as Friday Flybys, but get 'em while you can...)

First, greetings to everyone in Los Angeles this week for California Space Authority's Transforming Space 2007, including lawyer and government space folks like Shana Dale, Jane Harman, Adam Schiff, Ken Calvert and Doug Griffith, as well as newspace gurus Elon Musk, Peter Diamandis, Anousheh Ansari and many others. Congratulations to all the CSA 2007 SpotBeam Awards recipients, including Space Innovation Award winner XCOR Aerospace. Hoping for a few recaps from LA, if not perhaps a couple of glossies from the event's smokin' space fashion show (where, as I had promised, no lawyers would be modeling space lawyer suits and couture. If we're lucky.)

Flybys (in no particular order or trajectory, as usual) . . .

Power space: We've discussed space solar power and the NSSO Interim Assessment, now Col. Coyote Smith wants your comments. (Hat tip: HobbySpace)

Space race v. auctioning: Sam "big advocate of space property rights" Dinkin replies to Prof. Reynolds.

NEO's hit Congress: A reminder, the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee rescheduled hearing, Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) - Status of the Survey Program and Review of NASA’s Report to Congress is now on for Nov. 8th, 10 am.

Andrei Kislyakov comments on the row over Baikonur.

Reach to Space 2007 - Space Commercialization Conference - Coming up Nov. 12-13, 2007 at George Washington University in Washington DC, and featuring a number of space lawyer speakers: Franceska O. Schroeder of Fish & Richardson P.C., Del Smith of Jones Day, Tara Giunta of Paul Hastings, along with government space folks such as Kenneth Wong, of FAA and Ed Morris of the Department of Commerce's Office of Space Commercialization (or is it the Office of Space Commerce? ;)

Fly over to FAA for the October COMSTAC meeting presentations. (In case you missed Clark's link last week.)

Space station law 101: Nice little recap of discussions at the recent Humans in Outer Space conference in Vienna where space lawyers Ulrike Bohlmann, Frans von der Dunk and others noodle about applicable law on Europe's collaborative Columbus space laboratory (scheduled to launch Dec. 6th). Law is easy, getting the thing out there is what amazes me. (For a good overview, see ISS legal framework, courtesy ESA.) Space lawyers love this stuff.

Space strike over: NASA shuttle launch workers get new contract. (Helmet tip: NASA Watch)

NASA unhijacks airline safety data, (but it may be keeping other secret stuff some people believe the agency has. Hmm. I'm not sure. More FOIA requests, Dick? ;)

Spaceport America predicts FAA license by Sept. 2008: Spaceports blog has an update. (Hi, Jack ;)

Police radar gun vs. teen's GPS tracker: Traffic court gets techier.

Yes and no: Yes, it is interesting that the judge granted the defendant astronaut's motions to suppress key evidence, and no this is still not a space law case. (And see videos linked here for a clip from a hearing in which Nowak is asked, "what is a lawyer?" Notice she is not asked, "what is a space lawyer?")

Just say no?: Iain Murray offers his analysis of Why America doesn't ratify treaties (Oct. 17, 2007).

This blog is not Space Food Probe, but the blog, Japan Probe (that's right, but no relation as far as I know) has a tasty tidbit about JAXA-endorsed space curry for sale. Yum. (Hat tip: NASA Watch, which has the space curry video.)

Out of his lane: Dennis Kuchinich gets 24.3 light years per gallon.

A few accolades:

Congratulations to China on Chang'e-1 entering lunar orbit: the nation's first circumlunar satellite.

Congratulations to SpaceX on ground breaking at Space Launch Complex 40 (SLC-40) at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, "opening a new era in commercial space operations." Looking forward to Falcon 9's maiden launch in late 2008.

And double thumbs up on the launches of Space Angels Network and International Institute of Space Commerce. Give us a holler at SLP if you want to meet friendly space lawyers, any time. Space means business.

Finally, it's probably way to early in the week to contemplate but black holes may harbour their own universes. Yup, even more space lawyers needed.

* * *
IMAGE CREDIT: XCOR Aerospace.

Awaiting UK space tourism rules

2007-11-05T10:35:00.000-08:00

What's news about calls for updated British commercial space law? Here in "the colonies," for a while now we've been expecting some hot action over in the UK on space tourism regulation.

But last week the Telegraph's science (not law) correspondent Richard Gray filed the nice but not exactly news-intensive item, Ministers order review of space law. He reports that UK science minister Ian Pearson "asked the British National Space Centre to produce a consultation on updating the Outer Space Act 1986."

Here's the whole newsflash:

A trip into outer space may seem a good way to escape everyday life on Earth, but British space tourists will find that while they might defy gravity, there is to be no getting away from the law.

Ministers have ordered a review of an obscure piece of legislation controlling the UK's activities in space. They believe that when Virgin Galactic and other companies begin offering public flights into space, rules will be needed to control the industry and the behaviour of British subjects in orbit.

New regulations are expected to deal with criminal offences in space, to ban dumping of waste and to prevent damage to Mars and the moon.

Virgin Galactic hopes to begin commercial flights by early 2009. Ahead of that, Ian Pearson, the science minister, has asked the British National Space Centre to produce a consultation on updating the Outer Space Act 1986.

Fair enough. (Apart from that reference to UK's existing space law as an "obscure piece of legislation." We beg your pardon!) The article doesn't indicate the venue or occasion which may have prompted Pearson to made the statement.

In any case, yes, we know. So what are they waiting for?

Meanwhile, over the UK space policy side, we see a lot of action underway and documents orbiting. As I reported, the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee in July issued its space policy report entitled, 2007: A Space Policy, which naturally included a section addressing space tourism. And in October, as expected, the government published its response to the Science and Technology Committee Report on space.

The space policy report states:

61. We are excited by the potential afforded by sub-orbital travel and the rise of the space tourism industry. We do not believe that it is the responsibility of Government to fund this work but developments in this area should be encouraged through appropriate regulation. The BNSC should use its consultation on regulation to discuss the establishment of a regulatory framework and responsible body with the relevant authorities. We recommend that the Government continues its policy of non-financial support to the space tourism industry and that it outline the developing nature of that support in the forthcoming space strategy. (Paragraph 334)

And in its response, the government specifies:

The Government agrees with this Recommendation and is keen to explore the commercial opportunities for the UK offered by this new emerging field as well as to develop a suitable regulatory regime for it. It has had preliminary discussions with FAA colleagues in the USA with a view to understanding their approaches. It will be seeking views on the approach to space tourism in the public consultation relating to the review of the Outer Space Act (OSA) regulatory approach.

There you have it.

Good start.

* * *
IMAGE: Courtesy Virgin Galatic. Cheers!

Office of Space Commerce (again)?

2007-11-02T17:15:00.000-07:00

An SLP reader (who apparently fails to realize it is Friday afternoon) e-mailed to ask why the bill to update the Department of Commerce's Office of Space Commercialization (OSC) is not on Thomas.

Ah. Simple: the proposed bill, called the "Space Commerce Act of 2007," sent to the Hill by the Bush administration in October, as yet has no sponsor and has not been introduced. Stay tuned. (The proposed measure falls under the jurisdiction of the House Science Committee.)

Meanwhile, I am happy to post the proposed text, below (it's short). The bill would update 15 U.S.C. §1511e in various ways, including change the name of the Office of Space Commercialization back to the Office of Space Commerce (and I'm not sure that's actually an update), refocus responsibilities and emphasise promotion of geospatial technology and support for positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) organizations.

As we've noted here on SLP, talk of reviving and updating the office is not new. One issue was how much focus Commerce would place on established sectors such as communications, GPS and remote sensing, versus our emerging space and sub-orbital industries.

From some of the proposed language including the mandate to "promote the advancement of United States' geospatial technologies related to space commerce" we see why geospatial industry folks love the proposal. The proposed bill does not similarly addresss space tourism or technologies related thereto.

By the way, Ed Morris, director of OSC (pictured here), is scheduled to keynote at the Reach to Space conference at which I'm sure he will discuss his office and the legislative proposal. (As a mini-preview we have one slide titled "Space Commerce Act of 2007" from Ed's presentation at a recent event organized by the National Military Intelligence Association). (Yes, I jacked his slide and his picture. Now I owe him two favors.)

On a semi-related note, for those of you who can't get enough of strategic plans (and who can?) here is the OSC Strategic Plan: U.S. Leadership in Space Commerce (March 2007).

Now without further ado (and no follow-up questions, please - I have dinner plans ;), the proposed Space Commerce Act of 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL To provide technical corrections to the Technology Administration Act of 1998, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1: SHORT TITLE.
(a) This Act may be cited as the "Space Commerce Act of 2007."

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OFFICE OF SPACE COMMERCE.
(a) The heading of 15 U.S.C. § 1511e is deleted and replaced with the following:

"Office of Space Commerce".

(b) Section 8(a) of the Technology Administration Act of 1998 (15 U.S.C. § 1511e(a)) is amended to read as follows:

"There is established within the Department of Commerce an Office of Space Commerce (referred to in this section as the “Office”)".

SEC. 3. FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICE OF SPACE COMMERCE.
Section 8(c) of the Technology Administration Act of 1998 (15 U.S.C. § 1511e(c)) is amended to read as follows:

"Functions of Office.― The Office shall be the principal unit for space commerce policy activities within the Department of Commerce. The Office shall―

"(1) Foster the conditions for the economic growth and technological advancement of the United States’ space commerce industry;

"(2) Coordinate space commerce policy issues and actions within the Department of Commerce;

"(3) Represent the Department of Commerce in the development of United States policies and in negotiations with foreign countries to promote United States’ space commerce;

"(4) Promote the advancement of United States’ geospatial technologies related to space commerce, in cooperation with relevant interagency working groups; and

"(5) Provide support to the U.S. Government organizations established pursuant to the United States Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Policy issued December 8, 2004 (and any successor organizations)".

Space 2.0 lawyers

2007-11-01T15:42:00.000-07:00

By now everyone knows the difference between old space and newspace, or, shall we say, Space 1.0 and Space 2.0.

"Space 1.0' was astronauts, rocket ships and billion-dollar government projects. 'Space 2.0' is venture-backed entrepreneurs starting new companies with new technologies."

That's the clarification from Burke Fort, director of the Eighth Continent Project, the initiative launched this summer and headquartered in Colorado which bills itself as "the world's most comprehensive program to integrate space technology and resources into the global economy."

Good for Colorado, too. (I thought it was New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson but it was in fact Colorado Governor Bill Ritter to whom we may attribute the quote, "For the first time, government, industry and academia have joined forces with entrepreneurs and venture capitalists to forge the next frontier in commercializing space technology and resources." (Where is his state's spaceport?)

Space 2.0 is about business, and naturally all kinds of lawyers and firms are prepared -- or will be -- to offer key services and get in the Space 2.0 game. An early adapter in the Space 2.0 law arena, Townsend and Townsend and Crew has announced it is a founding sponsor of Eighth Continent which means the law firm has signed on to "provide both funding sponsorship and legal services" to the project.

Interestingly, Townsend doesn't have a space law or aerospace group. But they are a top patent and trademark firm. And the firm covers many practice areas and specialties including technology transactions that are sure to come in handy. Which tells you something about the nature of space business law practice at 21st century firms.

Yes, like Web 2.0, everyone can get in on Space 2.0.

Join the 2.0 club.

* * *
Speaking of space law action in Colorado, a reminder about a CLE offering: the Colorado Bar Association's 6-credit CLE program on Aviation and Space Law takes place Nov. 15 in Denver (with video replays Dec. 7 in Colorado Springs, etc.) Of course, we know what happens when air law and space law share a seminar -- typically air gets most of the attention. As I noted, among the panels at this CLE on air crashes, aviation transactions, aviation environmental issues, there is one panel covering, "What's New in Space Law," presented by Rachel A. Yates, who can handle it all -- she is both a 1.0 and 2.0 space lawyer.

Cleaning up space debris standards

2007-10-31T12:46:00.000-07:00

The new edition of NASA's Orbital Debris Quarterly News (Oct. 2007) is chock full of space trash insights and developments, mostly from a technical perspective. Space junk junkies, dig in.

On the policy side, the report includes an overview of the two changes issued in August by the space agency to update its own requirements and standards for mitigating orbital debris.

And I don't mind sharing that overview here on squeaky clean SLP:

-----------------------------------------------
New NASA Procedural Requirement and Technical Standard for Limiting Orbital Debris Generation

On 17 August 2007, NASA’s Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer, Bryan O’Connor, signed NASA Procedural Requirements(NPR)8715.6, the latest revision in NASA’s 15-year-old policy designed to curtail the growth of the orbital debris population. On 28 August 2007, the NASA Technical Standard (NS) 8719.14 was also signed by Bryan O’Connor, updating the aging NASA Safety Standard 1740.14, Guidelines and Assessment Procedures for Limiting Orbital Debris, issued in 1995.

NPR 8715.6 recognizes the ongoing importance of orbital debris mitigation, both nationally and internationally, and a need to expand the responsibilities of various organizations within NASA. Fourteen organizations or positions within NASA are now assigned explicit orbital debris mitigation duties by the NPR, in contrast to only ten organizations or positions cited in the previous NASA Policy Directive (NPD 8710.3B), and only four in the policy before that one.

The NPR provides requirements to implement NASA’s policy for limiting orbital debris generation per the U.S. National Space Policy of 2006, Section 11. In conjunction with the related NASA standard, the NPR is consistent with the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines, as well as Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines.

As outlined in section 1.3.11 of the NPR, the NASA Orbital Debris Program Office shall:
1. Develop, maintain, and update the orbital debris environment models to support this NPR.
2. Assist NASA mission program/project managers in technical orbital debris assessments.
3. Provide assistance to the Department of Defense and other U.S. Government departments and organizations on matters related to the characterization of the orbital debris environment and the application of orbital debris mitigation measures and policies for NASA space missions.
4. Participate in the determination, adoption, and use of international orbital debris mitigation guidelines through international forums such as the UNCOPUOS, the IADC, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
5. Maintain a list of predicted reentry dates for NASA spacecraft and their associated orbital stages and notify the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance at least 60 days prior to their reentry.
Approved by NASA Headquarters and NASA Centers, NS 8719.14 provides uniform engineering and technical requirements for processes, procedures, practices, and methods for NASA programs and projects to adhere to orbital debris requirements.

NS 8719.14 requires NASA projects to assess compliance in the following areas:
1. Debris Released During Normal Operations
2. Debris Released by Explosions and Intentional Breakups
3. Debris Generated by On-Orbit Collisions
4. Postmission Disposal of Space Structures
5. Survival of Debris from the Postmission Disposal Atmospheric Reentry Option
6. Tether Missions

The Standard reflects significant improvements in both the technical foundation of the standard and assessment process, as well as addressing new areas of debris mitigation, such as tethers, the Moon, Mars, and Lagrange points. Where appropriate, minor changes were incorporated to ensure that the Standard is consistent with the latest national and international orbital debris mitigation guidelines.

The moon this time

2007-10-30T14:35:00.000-07:00

In addition to making space history and global headlines, last week's liftoff of Chang'e I, China's first moon probe, relaunched the older than moon rocks debate about human intentions and lunar resources.

For example, linked on Instapundit today we find Andrew Smith's Guardian piece in which the writer voices a not uncommonly held view that the new space race differs from the first in that it ain't about science or discovery, but rather, "plundering the moon."

Amid the talk of helium-3 there's little legal discussion, however for that we can pick from a wealth of law commentary, from decades to minutes old, addressing aspects of the complex legal issues concerning lunar resources. I'll be posting more of those; and for now, Prof. Glenn Reynolds, who lamented on his aforementioned blog "the defeatist, anti-humanity tone of many of the comments" to Smith's piece, and suggests that "private property rights are likely to be both more environmentally friendly and more wealth-creating than centralized regulatory schemes," offers a well-seasoned but still insightful article he wrote with Robert P. Merges, on Space Resources, Common Property, and the Collective Action Problem (New York University Environmental Law Journal, 1997).

In it, Glenn (who has been writing, teaching and thinking about this stuff way longer than he's been doing that little blog thing he does) and his co-author conclude:

The waning of enthusiasm for common heritage schemes in the space context poses a challenge for space law, and for space development enthusiasts: the challenge of coming up with something that addresses the most important concerns motivating "common heritage" proposals without embodying the statist and anti-market character that such proposals tend to share. Properly crafted, property rights approaches are likely to be lower in cost, and better at protecting the environment, than are centralized bureaucratic regimes. We have suggested some considerations involved in applying property rights to space resource development. We hope that others will join in the conversation.

Many have. And I second that excellent invitation. (And if you would like to share a rebuttal to the article, or offer related thoughts or writings -- for or against moon "plundering"? -- don't hesitate to forward to me for linking or plund-- I mean, posting.)

The conversation continues.

* * *

UPDATE: By the way, yes, you will find among the materials presented at this month's gathering of FAA's Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC), a powerpoint on China's Space Activities (especially for those who can't get enough COMSTAC PowerPoints, and who can?) (Hat tip HobbySpace.)

New Mexican and Other Flybys - 10.29.07

2007-10-29T16:17:00.000-07:00

Not for full-fledged, hardcore, xtreme members of our NewSpace era only: if you missed the space scene out at Las Cruces and Holloman Air Force Base last week and over the weekend, there's always blogspace for catching up. Thanks to Alan Boyle, Clark Lindsey, Rand Simberg, Jeff Foust and everyone who live blogged the action from the International Symposium for Personal Spaceflight and the far out X Prize Cup.

Scroll through dispatches from the commercial space frontier for recaps and multimedia of the Lunar Lander Challenge, (I like the positive spin in the event's press release: Armadillo missed by only seven seconds. Next year they win), along with payloads of news from New Mexico including Rocketplane Global's unveiling of the reshaped, roomier and beefier XP suborbital spaceplane, Orbital Outfitters voguing of the first commercial spacesuit (strike a space pose; and I might know a few subway riders who'd like to wear it for their commute to the office), Rocket Racing League's announcement of new teams, and lots more.

A few additional highlights:

Space Angels Network: check out the newly launched an online venue to hook up individual investors with space entrepreneurs. The managing angel, Guillermo Söhnlein is a lawyer (or I should say, he is a JD). And I note top law firm Morrison & Foerster is listed as a sponsor/partner of the venture. Some angels prefer rockets to wings.

Big shots: Brian Berger reports on the XPC's invitation-only executive summit hosted by Esther Dyson. (And I see Christopher Stott of the space-friendly, tax-averse Isle of Man had a few things to say about governments as customers: "They are incredibly risky. They pay late, if they pay at all. They cancel contracts on you. They have clauses about Congress changing its mind once a year. Politics intervenes and you investment disappears." Hi, Chris. ;)

OK, it's Teachers in Space not Lawyers in Space. But maybe someday....

Overall, looks like the exposition and events in New Mexico promoted commercial space business, education, and frolicking all around. 'Til next year. (Regards to Governor and presidential hopeful Richardson.)

For now, a quick handful of other assorted Flybys:

Forecast space: Futron has released its 2007 Forecast of Global Satellite Demand. And here's the executive summary. There's no section forecasting demand for satellite lawyers. Extrapolate that yourself.

Defending the Treaty: Finally, after all the recent treaty slamming, someone defends the OST, no holds barred, even if she has to launch a new blog to do it. Congrats again to Joanne and the NCRSASL on Res Communis, a University of Mississippi blog covering aerospace which does include air law but we can overlook that. Great job, PJ and everyone.

Greetings to those gathered at the conference, Risk & Exploration: Earth as a Classroom, - Oct. 28-30, at Louisiana State University. Space lawyer Art Dula will participate in the session tomorrow on, "Risk & Commercial Space Exploration" (2:00-5:00pm) and we can tune in for a live webcast.

Clark reports: "Looks like the PlanetSpace deal with Lockheed Martin and the Canadian government is going nowhere."

Who among us can't use: An Attorney's Guide to Space Travel - Sonia E. Miller (Sept. 19, 2007; New York Law Journal but subscription is unfortunately required, and although I used to work at American Lawyer Media which owns the NYLJ and lots of other stuff, don't ask me to post my little essay, "An Attorney's Guide to Hacking Subscription Sites". You're on your own.)

Spin through Milbank's succinct Space Business Review for Sept. 2007 (which I meant to post a few Flybys ago). Hi to Peter Nesgos.

Kudos: Lots of launch action last week while newspace stormed New Mexico and I want to note these notable events...

Flygirls together: SLP says hats off to Discovery commander Pamela Melroy and ISS commander Peggy Whitson. Very cool.

Congratulations to China on the launch of Chang'e-1, (嫦娥一号) the nation's first moon orbiter. The craft, named after the goddess of the Moon, is expcted to arrive in lunar orbit Nov. 5.

Also, after Kazakhstan lifted the ban on Proton launches from Baikonur which it imposed in the wake of the Sept. 6 Proton crash, on Friday Russia launched a Proton carrying three satellites of the GLONASS navigation system. Meanwhile, Kazakhstan wants $60 million (1.5 billion rubles) in compensation for the September accident. (RIA Novosti) More on that later.

And that's all for Monday.

(By the way, the new Space Lifestyle Magazine, which I have not yet read, gets me thinking: why not a space lawyer lifestyle magazine? Hmm. Nah...)

Finally, if the week is dragging and you're stuck on Earth, take a break and stick your toes in some fake Mars dirt (ok, Martian regolith simulant). Might perk you right up. (Hat tip: SpaceRef)

* * *

IMAGE: XP by Rocketplane Global.

"What the heck is space law?"

2007-10-26T13:29:00.000-07:00

Glad they asked! (And what took 'em so long?) Well, for the benefit of everyone hanging out in blogspace today who would rather be at X Prize Cup (ahem), over at the Wall Street Journal's popular law blog (which is in fact called Law Blog), Prof. Henry Hertzfeld of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University got to answer some basic questions and give a quickie lesson on space law.

Very quickie. Of course he could go on and on. Speaking of which, stay tuned to SLP for our upcoming features on cool space lawyers (and aren't they all?) which will include profiles, Q&A, photos and behind the scenes insights into this emerging 21st century legal speciality that's poised to leave terrestrial law practice in the Earthly dust. Watch. (You too, Law Blog. ;)

(Oh. And thanks for the nice plug, FutureSpaceLawyer. Good luck opening your practice on Mars. ;)

* * *
IMAGE: Rick Guidice, courtesy NASA.

NASA hijacks air safety data

2007-10-25T16:44:00.000-07:00

(Really bummed about not being in New Mexico right now. Never mind. What can I post as a distraction? Hmm. Here's something.)
* * *
Actually lots of folks were probably surprised to learn that NASA gathered air safety data from pilots. But even more surprising than that revelation were reports the space agency withheld its pilot survey data then dissed a request under the Freedom of Information Act made by the Associated Press seeking the aviation safety records. (I admit I didn't know NASA even spoke to commercial airline pilots. I might have mistakenly filed that FOIA request with FAA, not NASA. Things you don't learn in law school. Come to think of it, the FAA is big into space these days, so the bureaucratic turf lines can get a bit confusing. Although FAA regulates commercial not civil space and doesn't much mess with NASA's business.)

In any case, I will weigh in with everyone (see e.g. the New York Times editorial this morning) calling for the agency to release the goods. Really. An almost four-year $8.5 million safety survey of approximately 24,000 commercial and general aviation pilots who were interviewed by NASA for 30 minutes each, the results of which revealed "at least twice as many bird strikes, near mid-air collisions and runway incursions as other government monitoring systems show"? (FAA isn't so sure.) And NASA wants to keep this to itself and worse, has requested the contractor on the project to delete the data from its computers? Come on.

There is no valid reason to deny the FOIA requests. Even Mike Griffin disagrees with his agency's rationale. Let's review NASA's own FOIA regulations (14 CFR Part 1206). AP has. Must Congress schedule a public hearing on this issue and possibly issue subpoenas? Apparently it must.

Worse, of course: now the public finds itself wondering what other information NASA might be withholding regarding its own awesome and dangerous flying machines and risky space business if the agency is willing to go out of its way to cover up safety and mishap data on silly airplanes. Yikes.

Good Weather Satellites

2007-10-24T18:12:00.000-07:00

For you fans of geostationary weather satellites who are following the subcommittee on energy and environment of the House Science and Technology Committee as it follows of the progress of the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) program, (and come on, who isn't?) here, hot off the GAO's presses is the 42-page report released at this week's oversight hearings, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites: Progress Has Been Made, but Improvements Are Needed to Effectively Manage Risks. (GAO-08-18, Oct. 2007).

Basically, GAO, which continues to review GOES-R series acquisition, looked at status and plans for the program and evaluated "whether NOAA is adequately mitigating key technical and programmatic risks."

(By the way, for those who need a refresher, the report includes a bit of background on geostationary and polar-orbiting environmental satellites -- both used by the US for weather observation, research and forecasting since the 1960's -- along with a brief overview of prior GOES series. NOAA’s National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service [NESDIS] of course manages both GOES and the Polar Operational Environmental Satellites.)

Over at the hearings, subcommittee ranking member Bob Inglis (R-SC) asked about cost and schedule estimate "discrepancies" between that of NOAA and GAO and said: "Those of us responsible for this program, Congress, NOAA, and NASA, cannot allow delays and cost overruns. GOES-R today is a $6.9 billion program for two satellites. That is a lot of taxpayer money. We expect that investment to provide a series of weather satellites that are launched on time and provide data to ensure the most accurate possible weather forecasting and modeling."

For her part, in prepared testimony for the subcommittee yesterday, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Information Services Mary E. Kicza said, "I will be the first to acknowledge that NOAA does not have a strong track record with regard to recent satellite acquisition development efforts. We appreciate the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO’s) recognition that, in the GOES-R acquisition, 'progress has been made.'"

Indeed, running weather satellite programs is stormy business. And the saga continues.

(On a related note, for you junkies, the House also has this roundup of its oversight of the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), which it first described as: "A vital weather satellite program that is being jointly developed by NOAA, DOD, and NASA that is billions of dollars over budget and several years behind schedule," but then in June, crediting lawmaker oversight, called the program back on track.

(Yes, this wrangling is much more predictable than the weather.)

* * *

UPDATE: Meanwhile, as wildfires continue to rage in California this week, GOES-11 captured this image of smoke rising from flaming and scorched land.

Get Your 2008 Moot On

2007-10-23T18:20:00.000-07:00

Now that the winners of the 2007 Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot Court Competition have celebrated returning the coveted Lachs Trophy to Washington and reveled in their boundless moot glory, it's not too early for the vanquished and all else who take up the challenge to begin contemplating arguments for the 2008 moot problem. And here it is:

Concordia and Landia v Usurpia: Case Concerning the Continued Provision of Lifeline Satellite Services to Countries in the Face of Satellite Operator Insolvency.

Another space whopper of a case.

Now don't send me your outlines or I will be ever so tempted to post them here. And I trust no one needs to review How to lose an appeal. But here is a primer on Using Westlaw to Research and Write a Moot Court Brief although it's all pretty obvious (but good marketing for Westlaw, too bad I'm not getting paid. And you also know about Lexis, etc., not to mention all the free resources online.)

You can review winning space moot briefs from the 2001 competition (Soliscalor v Cornucopia), here and here, courtesy of moot organizers and the National University of Singapore, whose team of Geraldine Goh and Celina Chua won the competition that year. (Just for the record, the 2001 runner-up was the University of North Carolina.)

And if you would like to check out a few winning non-space law briefs, there's always the Chicago-Kent College of Law Moot Court Honor Society's best brief database.

Naturally, here on SLP space moot is our favorite moot. But for those eclectic if not downright obsessive fans of fake court competition everywhere (you know who you are), besides other international law moot events such as the prestigious Jessup Cup, there are moot, mock, fake, simulated and otherwise not-ready-for-reality-TV (or Court TV for that matter) scholarly battles and competitions in a multiplicity of legal disciplines, including, in no particular order: animal law, human rights, bankruptcy, European law, information technology and privacy law, environmental law, constitutional law, commercial arbitration, intellectual property, trademark, economics and law, negotiation, and lots more.

Yes, it's a mootfest, a veritable parade of unrepentant mootness, all year, every year. So get your moot on. And remember, as always we do not take moot court bets or any other wagers here on Space Game Pr-- I mean, Space Law Probe. (And no, I don't see moot court covered over on Intrade.com, "the prediction market". You're on your own.) (Speaking of predictions, just because I'm from NYC doesn't mean I'm betting against Boston in the moot baseball-- I mean, World Series, either.)

Good luck all!

* * *
Law is the only game where the best players get to sit on the bench.
-- (I have no clue who said this; e-mail me if you know...? ;)

Rocketplane launches appeal

2007-10-22T18:35:00.000-07:00

Rocketplane Kistler (RpK) lawyers were apparently standing by and took one day to fire off a letter to begin the process of appealing NASA's decision to terminate its Space Act Agreement with the company under the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program.

As Brian Berger reports in Space News today, in response to NASA's announcement Oct. 18, the terminated COTS winner sent a letter on Oct. 19 calling the space agency's decision "arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion that will not withstand judicial scrutiny should this matter remain unresolved after the three NASA levels of review" and asked NASA to "either reconsider the termination or give the company $10 million for progress it made toward its unmet milestones."

I have not seen the Space Act Agreement, but Space News reports under its terms RpK can sue NASA in federal court after exhausting "a three-step appeals process that begins with NASA's COTS contracting officer and ends with the agency's associate administrator for exploration systems, Rich Gilbrech, who signed off on RpK's termination."

For its part, Alan Lindenmoyer, NASA's COTS program chief is quoted by Space News saying, "We spent the last year trying to work with RpK to give them every opportunity to succeed. Based on its failure to meet its performance milestones, we've come to the conclusion that it is in NASA's best interest to discontinue our funded Space Act Agreement and reopen the competition."

And NASA spokesperson Melissa Mathews confirmed, "The Oct. 18 termination letter is a final agency decision," and the company's appeal would not delay NASA's new COTS solicitation, under which RpK may submit a new proposal.

Alas. It seems like yesterday (well, August 2006) that RpK, along with SpaceX celebrated winning the COTS competition. (SpaceX, which won the larger of the two awards, shared not RpK's difficulties meeting milestones.)

Meanwhile, it's back to square one as NASA solicits new proposals. Clark Lindsey comments here. And never mind the K-1 orbital vehicle, there's still space tourism and the XP spacecraft for Rocketplane. (Via HobbySpace)

Friday Flybys - 10.19.07

2007-10-19T17:16:00.000-07:00

As severe rain and other kinds of storm activity rips through the East Coast here, some quick and hopefully dry Flybys....

First, from The Space Review:

Stagnant Space Treaty? Yes, another thoughtful critique (the third in four weeks, unless I missed a few) of the now 40-year old Outer Space Treaty in one of our favorite weekly publications here in blogspace, The Space Review (which, despite any rumors to the contrary, does not necessarily find itself contemplating changing its name to the The Space Treaty Review). This week, Jessica West of Project Ploughshares (which I understand is "an agency of the Canadian Council of Churches," that "provides expertise and analysis to the Council and its members on peace and security issues, and assists them in shaping an ecumenical response to those issues") writes of the "continuing relevance of the OST as the cornerstone of outer space governance" and voices concern that "there are environmental, political, military, and technological challenges to this regime...." She contemplates the troublesome Chinese ASAT test in light of the Treaty's unused provisions for international consultation if a planned activity could cause harmful interference to other states. Her point: "The OST, while more or less observed, is not engaged, and risks growing stagnant. After 40 years it is time for a review of the letter, spirit, and application of the OST so that it can continue to guide the international community towards the type of security in outer space that can support the fulfillment of our imaginations.

And from The Space Review last week (yes, I'm catching up; and no mention of the Treaty here):

Regs, regs, regs: It ain't just FAA -- it's EPA and BATFE and "spaceport regulations, the county and state regulations, Department of Transportation regulations," and... oh yeah. Joe Latrell, CEO (rocketeer, non-lawyer) of Beyond-Earth Enterprises steps up to rebut the regulatory myth" that commercial space regulation is "virtually non-existent". Believe it, or talk to his lawyers.

And now, don't hold your applause...

The International Institute of Space Law's Life Time Achievement Award goes to... Mr. K. R. Sridhara Murthi, executive director of Antrix Corporation Limited (the marketing arm of Indian Space Research Organization). The award is "presented in recognition of Mr. Sridhara Murthi’s service to the International community of nations, the International Institute of Space Law and other organisations in which he has made valuable contributions and provided sustained leadership in the furtherance of Astronautical sciences, development of International Space Law and Policy, international cooperation among scientists and lawyers of many nations throughout his distinguished career." Congratulations from SLP!

Next, show us the funding...

Federal spacebucks: Right, this blog is still not Space Budget Probe, thus we turn to others for the latest on the ongoing NASA appropriations process.

But other money matters are right us this blog's space alley...

Replacing Rocketplane: As the saga continues... Alan Boyle has the lowdown on NASA's termination of Rocketplane. And here is NASA's statement on opening up a new competition for COTS money.

Meanwhile, SpaceX rockets on.

But back to the regulators...

FAA at ABA: USA Today actually sent a reporter to the ABA's Forum on Air & Space Law meetup in Memphis when they heard FAA/AST chief Patti Grace Smith would be there. Other folks representing the space law side of the more than half air law conference included FAA senior attorney Laura Montgomery, and Tracey Knutson, who plainly articulated the hazardous nature of the spaceflight industry, saying, "We're going to kill some people." (And she does some of her best legal drafting and advising with that in mind.)

Speaking of FAA: Here's the busy agency's final Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Experimental Permits for 2007 X Prize Cup (Oct. 2007) Go Lunar Landing Challengers!

Meanwhile, over at school space...

Better than we think? (I'm not sure space law education has ever been the subject of debate in the letters pages of a national publications, until now...) In Wall Street Journal this week Prof. Henry R. Hertzfeld of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University responds to Prof. Matt Schaefer of The University of Nebraska who wrote in to lament the state of American space law education. Prof. Hertzfeld has a different perspective, and his points are good. Although I did get an e-mail from a 3L at a New York law school this week who said whenever he mentioned space law, he "mostly got blank stares followed by a glimmer of recognition. NO ONE at my school could give me any advice." (Yes we do need more Professor Hertzfelds and Schaefers.)

And a bit of Earthly politics...

Candidate space: Hillary came up in last week's flybys, now it's Rudy's turn. And all I can say is when he was mayor here in NYC, where we have all kinds of aliens, the Giuliani did not often get asked questions like this.

And from the other side of Earth...

Red space: Apparently it takes three or more taikonauts to start a branch of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in space. Yang Liwei, CPC member and China's first taikonaut is planning ahead. Good thing space is a big ideological and political neighborhood. (Xinhua)

(By the way, from SLP to China, happy 4th anniversary of the first manned space mission, launched Oct. 15, 2003.)

Wrapping up...

Why yes, there is a space law question on the History of International Law Quiz. (And yes you do know the answer.)

Finally, strong proof of water on Mars. Oh well. After this downpour I was hoping to find a spot of dry land somewhere...

Have a super weekend.

Stay afloat.

* * *
IMAGE: Kids dig Yang Liwei's space suit; Oct. 24, 2003. [newsphoto.com.cn]

Scientists, engineers, explorers, Langley and Yeager

2007-10-18T17:04:00.000-07:00

It's nice to see the House of Representatives taking a moment this week to honor the 50th anniversary of the space age with H.Con.Res. 225. This somehow simultaneously commemorative and forward-thinking resolution, inter alia, “declares it to be in America’s interest to continue to advance knowledge and improve life on Earth through a sustained national commitment to space exploration in all its forms, led by a new generation of well educated scientists, engineers, and explorers.” (My italics.)

Ah. As opposed to uneducated scientists, engineers, and explorers, then?

And what's this? No mention of lawyers? Well never mind. Thank you, House.

On a related note, the thoughtful lawmakers also passed H.Con.Res. 222, a resolution honoring NASA’s Langley Research Center on its 90th anniversary. And I want to second that with a wow. Ninety! Isn't that like impossibly old in space years? (More somberly, Jeff Foust reports the 421-0 roll call vote "was a bittersweet moment: the resolution has been introduced by the late Rep. Jo Ann Davis [R-VA] less than a week before her death." Our condolences to the Congresswoman's family and constituents.)

By the way, not just for those surprised to learn NASA's Langley is 40 years older than the space age itself (remember, in 1917 the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, NASA's predecessor, established the Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory in Virginia, now the NASA Langley Research Center), the space agency is hosting an open house Saturday, October 27, 2007 at LaRC in Hampton, Virginia to celebrate the field center's big nine oh.

And there's more. While it was pondering aerospace milestones, the House with its head still in the clouds also passed H.Res. 736, which honors "the 60th anniversary of the aeronautics research accomplishments embodied in 'the breaking of the sound barrier'." ("Whereas on the morning of October 14, 1947, an X-1 aircraft piloted by Captain Charles 'Chuck' Yeager was dropped from a B-29 carrier aircraft and 'broke the sound barrier' and achieved supersonic flight for the first time in history...")

All great. And much more to come.

Happy resolutions.

*****
Rules are made for people who aren't willing to make up their own.
--Chuck Yeager (not his lawyer)

Space law bibliography: 1930-2007

2007-10-17T15:28:00.000-07:00

That's right, it's not your grandfather's remote sensing and space law bibliography.

The latest unique resource from our friends at the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law at the University of Mississippi School of Law, who keep quite busy between publishing volumes of the Journal of Space Law, is a hot new book and searchable CD bibliography covering the wide world of published materials concerning remote sensing law and space law, along with (not that this blog would necessarily notice,) air law as well -- from 1930 though 2007.

Read the announcement. Then order a few hundred copies for your favorite space, remote sensing and aerospace clients and few close friends.

------------------------------
Journal of Space Law: Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law
International Bibliography 1930 - 2007
Book and searchable CD
Price: $45.00

***
The National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law is proud to announce a special publication, the Journal of Space Law: Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law International Bibliography 1930 - 2007.

This bibliography is an updated and expanded edition of the first one published by the Center in 2002. As did the first one, this bibliography addresses the legal and policy aspects of remote sensing and space law. However, this second edition has been expanded to include aviation law -- an extensive legal and policy field unto itself. Together, these topics span the entire spectrum of aerospace law.

The bibliography covers domestic and international literature, published in various languages, related to remote sensing, air, and space law and policy issues. It includes, for example, publications on data policy, privacy, liability, insurance, intellectual property, public law, and commercialization in the form of books, dissertations, reports, proceedings, symposia, government publications and other materials published between 1930 and 2007. Though the bibliography's focus is on law, a few relevant scientific and technical publications that can serve the lawyer, law student, and legal assistant as a reference are included.

The bibliography contains a special section on U.S. case law. It includes state and federal cases in which remotely sensed and other geospatial data were used in a variety of legal proceedings, particularly litigation. There is also a section on recent aviation case law from 1990 to 2007. Selected law review articles that discuss some of the cases are also listed. Research was conducted in the Westlaw, Lexis, and OCLC/Worldcat databases. Search terms included geographic information systems, GIS, geospatial, geospatial data, remote sensing, aerial photography, aerial photography, satellites, satellite images, global positioning system, GPS, radar, aerial images, and thermal imagery.

The bibliography is published as both a text and a searchable CD.
------------------------------

Outstanding.

(So, Joanne, when is the video coming out? ;)

Satellite finance news

2007-10-15T18:05:00.000-07:00

If you missed last week's ISCe Satellite Investment Symposium (ISIS) NYC '07, (Oct. 9th) which took place at The Princeton Club here in New York and featured "top executives in commercial satellite business as well as the key movers and shakers from Wall Street and the private financing community," (with plenty of their lawyers, of course) no worries, catch up with summaries of panels, speeches and news from the conference, via issues 1 and 2 of the event's daily briefings.

Also, heads up, ISIS NYC '08 is on for Tuesday, October 14, 2008, at The Princeton Club.

And for now, please ignore those few luddite anti-GPS striking NYC taxi drivers. Really, the Big Space Apple loves satellites.

No "legal showstoppers" to space solar power

2007-10-12T18:13:00.000-07:00

Adding to the sunny pile of already released and filed away government reports on space-based solar power, as anticipated, the Pentagon's National Security Space Office (NSSO) weighed in this week with its own two megawatts on the topic with the opus (or rather, "interim assessment"), Space-Based Solar Power as an Opportunity for Strategic Security," (Oct. 10, 2007).

Basically, study group wants the government to go for it.

I especially like the fact that "the SBSP Study Group found that no outright policy or legal showstoppers exist to prevent the development of SBSP." But no surprise, the study group cautions, "Full-scale SBSP, however, will require a permissive international regime, and construction of this new regime is in every way a challenge nearly equal to the construction of the satellite itself."

That's right. More work for space lawyers.

Reading through quickly, the study group's legal and policy recommendations include that:
- policy and legal framework development should begin simultaneously with any science and technology development efforts to ensure that intangible issues do not delay employment of technology solutions;
- U.S. industry should be exempt from ITAR when working with our closest and most trusted allies on SBSP systems (I can hear the cheering);
- government-funded SBSP technology maturation efforts should not include "buy America" clauses;
- the government should form a SBSP Partnership Council that consists of all relevant federal agencies
- the SBSP Partnership Council must be chaired and led by an existing or newly created single‐purpose civilian federal agency;
- the government should task one or more federal agencies for investing in key technologies needed for SBSP.

And while the study found "space‐based solar power is a complex engineering challenge, but requires no fundamental scientific breakthroughs or new physics to become a reality," it will take some new law. Proving once again that law can be a bigger "showstopper" than physics.

Read the whole report.

Yes, Elon Musk is quoted in it. (A little star power goes a long way.)

And space lawyers thanked and acknowledged for their contributions to the study include Art Dula, Rosanna Sattler, Wayne White and Mark I. Wallach.

Also, visit the new Space Solar Alliance for Future Energy (SSAFE) announced this week to "pursue recommendations" of the NSSO-led study. SSAFE is in the business of "advocating investment in space-based solar power technologies to address the planet’s future energy needs." The founding members are the National Space Society, Space Frontier Foundation, Space Power Association, Aerospace Technology Working Group, Marshall Institute, Moon Society, ShareSpace Foundation, Space Studies Institute, Spaceward Foundation, AIAA Space Colonization Technical Committee, ProSpace, Space Enterprise Council, and Space Generation Foundation.

And Space Law Probe (channeling "Solar Law Probe") is all for this.

* * *
IMAGE: ©Mafic Studios, Inc. (More cool space solar power images, courtesy of NSS, here.)

Schaefer on US space law education

2007-10-11T13:55:00.000-07:00

The US has always been a leader in space, but a follower in space law eduction. In the Wall Street Journal today, Professor Matt Schaefer, director of the University of Nebraska College of Law's hot, new, first-in-the-nation Space and Telecom Law Program, notes the "curious" lack until now of an American degree-bearing space law program, and calls for what will esentially be a new era for space law school in the US. And he's the guy leading the charge:

--------------------------------------------------------
Space Law in the U.S. Needs a Giant Leap

In response to "One Giant Leap" by Peter D. Zimmerman (editorial page, Oct. 1): Just as the Soviets beat the U.S. in launching a satellite into orbit in 1957, foreign academic institutions beat U.S. law schools in offering degrees in space law. McGill University in Montreal and Leiden University in the Netherlands have offered degrees in air and space law for many years. Yet in the U.S. no such degree program existed until the creation of the University of Nebraska College of Law's Space and Telecom Law LL.M. program that just received final university approval in June.

The absence of a degree-bearing program was particularly curious given that the U.S. is by far the largest actor in space, controlling or operating roughly 70% of space assets, and has the largest market share in both the global space and telecommunications industries. Just as the launch of Sputnik pushed a drive in math and science studies in the U.S., increased commercialization and militarization of space over the past decade has rekindled an interest in regulating space activities, at both the international and national levels. And just as the scientific and technical aspects of space activities bear witness to both cooperation and competition among nations, the space law community will follow suit.

For evidence of this dual trend, look no further than the invitation list to Nebraska's first conference on security and risk management in space activities, including scholars from the other leading space law institutes, as well as the hiring away of Leiden's resident space law expert, Frans von der Dunk, by Nebraska's new program. The space law community hopes that the same advances made through cooperation and competition in the scientific and technical aspects of space can be made in the legal arena as well.

Space Treaty turns 40

2007-10-10T13:06:00.000-07:00

Sputnik had a blast during its 50th anniversary celebration last week and it'll be hard to top all that.

Well today is the 40th anniversary 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.

I'm pretty sure the 40th anniversary of Star Trek last year garnered more attention and excitement than will this, even though without a doubt the Outer Space Treaty boldly went where no treaty on Earth had even imagined going before.

While some space agers love the so-called Magna Carta of space and want its provisions chiseled forever in moon rock, others continue to voice serious complaints and concerns about this fundamental framework of space law, with some of the contentious issues surrounding certain treaty provisions dating back to before the international agreement entered into force 40 years ago today -- Oct. 10, 1967.

Fear not, discussion and debate will continue as to next steps for international space law. For now, just a short post to quietly commemorate the 40th anniversary of the document that launched a thousand or more law careers.

As we recall, way back in 1967, a year of major Vietnam War battles and large anti-war protests, American race riots and the swearing in of the first black Supreme Court Justice, the Beatles, summer of love, Elvis and Priscilla tying the knot in Vegas, Aretha Franklin singing Respect, the first live, international, satellite TV show and the world's first heart transplant, space-faring nations the US and USSR, along with many others, joined in a ground-breaking agreement on space activities which may have been the best shot at the time for the world's first international space accord.

The historic year experienced a tragic start when on January 27, the day the US, Soviet Union and United Kingdom actually signed the Outer Space Treaty (and who can forget Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson's remarks from the East Room at the White House at the signing of the Treaty that day?), Apollo 1 astronauts Gus Grissom, Edward Higgins White, and Roger Chaffee died in a fire in Apollo 1 during a launch pad test. (A few months later, on April 24 cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov also lost his life when his Soyuz 1 parachute failed on reentry).

But the world saw a lot of great space action in '67, including launches in the Lunar Orbiter and Surveyor programs; Russia's Venera 4 and Cosmos 167, Mariner 5, and Apollo 4.

And space history rockets on.

So far there is nothing on the horizon to replace the Outer Space Treaty. And for the near future, I'll predict no great groundswell of support for withdrawing from it. But a lot of other space law-making is underway. Will the Outer Space Treaty survive intact another 40 years? We can only imagine what the next 40, 50 and for that matter, 500 years of our species' space activities will bring.

One thing, however, is certain: Lots more work for space lawyers ;)

Happy 40th.

----------------------------------
Change is the essential process of all existence.
-- Spock; "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", Star Trek stardate 5730.2

* * *
Image: NASA

Monday miscellany - 10.08.07

2007-10-08T18:18:00.000-07:00

(Monday musings, Monday mosh pit, Monday mashup? Never mind. A grab bag of items at the top of the week, best served in a Friday Flybys, but some weeks, well, you take 'em as they come...)

Privacy space: the Ninth Circuit issued an order temporarily enjoining NASA from requiring workers to respond to questionnaires in connection with background investigations under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12. The court said it had not had opportunity to "consider fully the voluminous material" (motions, responses and exhibits totaling 984 pages -- law clerks do math, not me) filed in the appeal, and the appellants "likely raise serious legal and constitutional questions...." Here is the Ninth Circuit's three-page order. Perhaps the space agency should explore space instead.

NYC space: Greeting from the SLP home office to Delbert Smith of Jones Day, all the satellite industry folks, telecom financial gurus and everyone here in town this week for ISCe Satellite Investment Symposium NYC '07 (Oct. 9) as well as SATCON - (Oct. 10-11). Have a NYC hotdog. (Or a much better lunch on Del, if you hire him.)

Power space: Looking forward to the announcement by NSS and friends on Wednesday regarding the launch of a new alliance for space solar power. Count this blog in. Also, looking forward to the release of that NSSO report on space solar power (which I talked about here.)

Things that go: For its contribution to the ABA's International Law Year in Review, the International Transportation Committee wants 500-1500 word updates on "legislative, regulatory, and judicial developments which affect international transportation in all modes." I bet they're not expecting space transportation. (See the 2006 Year in Review draft.) Submissions due by Dec. 1, 2007. E-mail Dean Saul, at Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada dean.saul@gowlings.com.

Speaking of ABA space, if you have news, etc. you'd like to post from the ABA Forum on Air & Space Law Annual Meeting last week in Memphis, Tennessee, send it here. Thanks!

An item to add to the line-up of upcoming space events of legal interest: Humans in Outer Space – Interdisciplinary Odysseys - Oct. 11-12, 2007 hosted by co-organized by the European Science Foundation (ESF), the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) in Vienna; and I see there will be a talk on "Space law in the age of ISS" by Frans von der Dunk of the University of Leiden (but soon to be at the University of Nebraska), and one titled, "In need of a legal framework for exploration" by Ulrike Bohlmann of ESA.

And other event: Transforming Space 2007 - Nov. 5-8, 2007, Los Angeles, California, hosted by the California Space Authority. I see on CSA's conference announcement and agenda a number of lawyer, lawmaker and government types listed as speakers, including Shana Dale, Jane Harman, Adam Schiff, Ken Calvert and Doug Griffith. Also appearing, space stars Elon Musk, Peter Diamandis, Anousheh Ansari and others. Yes the conference will host a space fashion show and no, there will be no space lawyers modeling space lawyer suits and couture. I promise.

Speaking of California Space Authority, Andrea Seastrand and Janice Dunn of CSA were David Livingston's guests on The Space Show on Friday. Listen to their talk.

Polling for treaties: Here are the results of a poll conducted this summer which asked adults in Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, and the US, "Do you support or oppose enacting a treaty that would ban all weapons in space? (Space lawyers were not separately polled about how they would draft such a treaty.) (The Simons Foundation / Angus Reid Strategies)

Speaking of treaties: Amid calls to do drastic things to the the Magna Carta of space, like oh, ditch it, here is one example of a pro-treaty comment on the anniversary of Sputnik last week -- Dr. Marc Garneau, former astronaut and head of the Canadian Space Agency, called for a work on new Canadian space policy and "talked about the need to strengthen the United Nations Outer Space Treaty.

Now who will bake a 40th anniversary cake?

Candidate space: Not sure if this translates to votes, but Sen. Hillary Clinton gave a speech last week on Sputnik's anniversary covering space policy. (Via SpaceRef, which is covering any statement by a candidate "regardless of party - that deals directly with space exploration" and gracioulsy bolded relevent portions of the speech.)

NASA Watch on saving Arecibo.

Another Nasdaq delisting warning for Spacehab. (How can this company not be worth $1 a share? Really, what's a dollar worth lately?)

No Supreme space: That's right, the new Supreme Court session is one week old today and the docket confirms, the High Court justices in their wisdom once again found cause to grant cert in no space law cases.

Civil space budget stuff: No need to rehash; of course NASA Watch and Space Politics cover the latest.

Fake science budget news: Will Congress fund a new $50 Billion Science Thing? One lawmaker seems to support the project, saying, "in the end, I have always said that science is more important than it is unimportant." (Via Cosmic Log)

And that's it for now. Hey, it's almost Tuesday...

* * *

IMAGE: Ah, great for a Monday -- or any day -- I love this painting, titled, "Hello Universe," by everyone's favorite astronaut and artist, Alan Bean.

Panel in Omaha

2007-10-05T10:01:00.000-07:00

(Another key item to add to the line-up of events of legal interest during this space anniversary season....)

In conjunction with Strategic Space and Defense 2007 which is taking place next week, Oct. 9-11, 2007 in lovely Omaha, the University of Nebraska Law School -- the new space law hot spot -- has put together this interesting space law seminar:

Formalism v. Informalism in Space Law - Oct. 9, 2007; 2:30-4:30PM at the Omaha Hilton.

Here's the description:

While new formal space treaties (or major amendment of existing treaties) are unlikely in the near future, there are an array of informal mechanisms and national legislation and practice that occur to regulate space--what degree of formalism is most appropriate, do certain informal mechanisms work better than others, what factors impact government choices regarding the degree of formalism, how do the informal mechanisms interact with the formal treaties, will informal mechanisms have to become more formalized over time, how do new space actors impact the choice between formal and informal mechanisms, and among informal mechanisms, given rapidly evolving technology and commercial activities are informal mechanisms going to continue to be the major law making device, how does potentially increasing militarization impact choices between formal and informal mechanisms, what “gaps” or issues in existing law most need “filling” through informal or formal mechanisms, etc.

Excellent, meaty topic. And these speakers can certainly handle it:

- Prof. Matt Schaefer, director of UNL College of Law's Space and Telecom Law Program;
- Steve Mirmina, Senior Attorney, NASA General Counsel’s Office;
- Darren Huskisson, former Chief Cyber and Space Law, USSTRATCOM;
- Jonathan Solomon, Legal Officer, Dept. of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Canada.

Enjoy! Greetings to friends in Nebraska.

(Note to Matt -- love the new logo. ;)

Счастливая Щ0тю Годовщина, Sputnik!

2007-10-04T17:37:00.000-07:00

Sputnik is responsible for launching more than the space age. Lots of lawyers got new jobs.

Here in the US, in the wake of the shock and awe from that globally mesmerizing first satellite on Oct. 10, 1957, fast reacting lawmakers launched space legislation in the form of the National Aeronautics and Space Act (signed into law by President Eisenhower in July 1958; we'll light NASA's 50th birthday candles next year), created new standing Congressional committees devoted to space and science, and increased federal funding for science and development. Just for starters. Lawyers couldn't be happier.

Internationally, over at the UN, space law-making began in 1958 when the General Assembly established the ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (resolution 1348 (XIII)), and 1959, made COPUOS a permanent organization (resolution 1472 (XIV). (It now has 67 members.) Courtesy of COPUOS we now have five international legal instruments and five sets of legal principles governing space-related activities, including the grandma of all space treaties, the Outer Space Treaty which entered into force on Oct. 10, 1967 (later, space law authority Prof. Bin Cheng noted, "the treaty was drawn up not only in some haste within the space of less than 12 months, but also less than ten years after the launch of the earth's first artificial satellite.")

And today many nations are drafting their own new space legislation; and forward-thinking state lawmakers have begun to craft commercial space age law, too.

Space lawyers are busy.

Naturally certain space law born of the Cold War has grown dated. Like space endeavours themselves, applicable law must continue to evolve. And that's all to the good. Leading space law pioneer and guru, Dr. Eileen Galloway recalled, "When we came together to begin drafting space law, it was somewhat unbelievable." Indeed it must have been. And here is a classic and fascinating Dr. Galloway speech entitled, Organizing The United States Government For Outer Space: 1957-1958, which she gave at a symposium, Reconsidering Sputnik: Forty Years Since The Soviet Sputnik, sponsored by the NASA Office of Policy & Plans; National Air & Space Museum; George Washington University Space Policy Institute and Kenan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC on Sept. 30 - Oct. 1, 1997. Read the whole thing.

(Some folks still ask, why do we need space law anyway? Well perhaps on a world in a parallel universe somewhere, the two resident superpowers pony up for the beginning of the space age, no lawyers join in, and that's fine. But not on this planet. Here you need lawyers. It's an Earth thing.)

So today, space lawyers and space agers alike say spaseeba! Thank you, Sputnik, for everything. And the first 50 years of this thing was just a warm up.

As we say here on SLP, the space law adventure is just beginning.

GW Triumphs Again

2007-10-03T18:12:00.000-07:00

The trophy is back in Washington and three is a charm. For the third time, George Washington University Law School fielded the talented team that conquered the world in the Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot Court Competition.

As I noted here, George Washington won the first-ever space moot in 1992 in Washington DC, and came back to win it again in 2005 in Fukuoka, Japan.

Congratulations from SLP to 2007 moot court galactic gladiators Magin Puig Monsen (J.D. '06, LL.M. '07) and D.J. Western (LL.M. '07) on prevailing in Emeralda v Mazonia ("The Case Concerning International Liability"). Space moot counsel, pictured here, took their skills and legal scholarship to the exciting world finals last week in Hyderabad, India and brought back the gleaming trophy.

And here are all the results from the 2007 space moot competition:

Winner: George Washington University

Runner up: University of Queensland, Australia

2nd Runner up: University of Leiden, the Netherlands

Winner of the Eilene Galloway Award for Best Brief:
University of Queensland, Australia

Winner of Sterns and Tennen award for Best Oralist:
Ms. Rola Lin, University of Queensland, Australia

Great space moot lawyering, everyone!

Sea and space law

2007-10-02T23:17:00.000-07:00

This blog is not Sea Law Probe, but it is familiar with the parallels between a certain failed instrument in space law on the one hand -- yes, the Moon Treaty -- and the widely accepted and ratified (by 155 nations) Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST) (or, as some prefer, UNCLOS).

Indeed the Moon Treaty (distinctly more lost than LoST appears to be), was in part modeled along the lines of the Law of the Sea Treaty, and in light of recent renewed calls for the US Senate to ratify the LoST (which requires a two-thirds majority vote), opponents of ratification often cite, and understandably so, the convention's inauspicious and lamentable relationship with the Moon Treaty (which nobody calls upon the Senate to ratify).

Now, in The Space Review, Taylor Dinerman switches gears on all this a bit. He considers the LoST in a new context, applying certain concerns therewith to another space treaty altogether -- just in time for the 40th anniversary of the Outer Space Treaty.

Taylor notes the "US State Department says that there is no connection between the LoST and the Outer Space Treaty..." and I agree. But he believes, "the same entropic process seems to be undermining both agreements and it is time to begin examining alternative arrangements."

(Some international treaties get little respect, even on their anniversary.)

Taylor expresses a variety of concerns, including that the Treaty preamble's language, “exploration and use of outer space should be carried out for the benefit of all peoples. . . opens the way for an attempt at control and taxation of the commercial space activities by international bodies." Well so far there's no big push to resurrect a Moon Treaty-type regime. Taylor correctly notes the LoST but not the OST includes the famously debated "common heritage of mankind" language. He does not specifically mention the "province of all mankind" language which does appear in the OST Article I.)

Taylor worries about "the first major politico-legal space crisis" under the OST and he envisions, "after the first big crisis," a "Space Yalta," that "might, for example, agree that the US and China would keep control of those parts of the Moon on which they had established their respective bases and the surrounding areas." Actually, depending upon the meaning of "control" here, if conduct did not involve permanent appropriation of territory, this might work under the OST's principles of "exploration and use" as well as non-interference.

Given the now mostly familiar objections to parts of the Outer Space Treaty (typically Article II draws the most heat), many lawyers and space age folks remain open to ideas about how to move forward with law that better reflects and fits our new and evolving commercial space era. Making international law is complicated. It's perhaps not so terrible that the UN COPUOS will likely not agree on any new space treaty draft any time soon.

For now, initial attempts by space-faring nations to agree on rights and responsibilities for conduct concerning their space endeavors will encounter varying degrees of success; and early international space law may require revision, replacement or other action. Alas, law in this changing arena, like space itself, remains to be explored and settled.

Spawn of Sputnik

2007-10-01T22:20:00.000-07:00

October 2007? Already?

Ok, good time to note a few events of legal interest this anniversary month (and a bit beyond), each of which in its own way serves to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the space age, gallantly ushered in by that noisy, Earth-rocking, mind-blowing, shiny little ball of a spacecraft on October 4, 1957. Thank you, Спутник-1 (Sputnik 1).

After all, reflecting back on the pre-space age, it's clear that here on the home planet the legal profession, having grown quite old and dullish, cried out for a dazzling new specialty. For bored lawyers, the dawn of the space age came not a moment too soon.

Here are some law-related gatherings nicely timed for Sputnik's anniversary. (And of course HobbySpace and its blogs cover all the goings-on for the space anniversary season.)

ABA Forum on Air & Space Law Annual Meeting - Oct. 3–5, 2007, Peabody Hotel, Memphis, Tennessee. As I've noted, this is the second big get-together scheduled for 2007, following the Washington, DC gathering in February). It's not just air anymore.

ISCe Satellite Investment Symposium NYC '07 - Oct. 9, 2007; New York, NY; with Delbert D. Smith, senior telecommunications counsel at Jones Day (host of last year's event), and many telecom financial gurus. (Blame Sputnik for all of this.)

SATCON - Oct. 10-11, 2007, Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, New York, NY; lots more satellite industry stuff.

Civil Society and Outer Space Forum 2007 - Oct. 8-9, 2007, Vienna, Austria, organized by the Conference of Non-governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO).

40th anniversary of the Outer Space Treaty going into force - Oct. 10, 2007. For better or worse? (Lots more on this to come.)

COMSTAC Meeting - Oct. 11, 2007; FAA Headquarters, Washington, DC

Remembering the Space Age: 50th Anniversary Conference - Oct. 22-23, 2007, NASA History Division and National Air and Space Museum Division of Space History; Washington, DC. (And by the way, NASA's 50th anniversary is one year from today, Oct. 1, 1958. ;)

Third International Symposium for Personal Spaceflight (ISPS 2007) - Oct. 24-25, 2007, Las Cruces, New Mexico. Kicking off the Wirefly X PRIZE CUP '07 and Holloman Air & Space Expo Oct. 26-28, 2007, Alamogordo, New Mexico.

Risk and Exploration II: Earth As A Classroom - Oct. 28-30; Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; featuring lots of astronauts, space lawyer Art Dula and other interesting folks.

Reach to Space 2007 - Nov. 12-13, 2007 Washington D.C.

Eilene M. Galloway Symposium on Critical Issues in Space Law (agenda to come) - Dec. 7, 2007; hosted by the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air and Space Law and the International Institute of Space Law; Cosmos Club, Washington D.C.

2nd International Conference on the State of Remote Sensing Law (agenda to come) - Jan. 16-18, 2008; hosted by the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air and Space Law; Oxford, Mississippi.

All good stuff for kicking off the second 50 years of the growing-older-by-the-minute space age.

And happy space anniversary, Earth lawyers and everyone ;).

* * *
UPDATE: And happy World Space Week, Oct. 4-10.... ;)

Nebraska Gets Von Der Dunk

2007-09-28T00:05:00.000-07:00

As the newly minted University of Nebraska College of Law's LL.M program in space law lifts off, the faculty is beginning to take shape in stellar way. And here's the latest announcement:

"Professor Frans Von Der Dunk will join the College of Law faculty in January of 2008.

Professor Von Der Dunk will teach space law, national security space law and European regulation of space to students in the Law College's new Space and Telecom Law LL.M. as well as to the Law College's J.D. students. His first course will be Space Law, to be taught in the Spring of 2008."

Great news for Nebraska Law. (Condolences to the International Institute of Air and Space Law at Leiden University where Prof. Von der Dunk is currently director of space law research.)

Nebraska's bio of Prof. Von der Dunk isn't posted yet; in the interim, here are just a few selected highlights of the professor's impressive career so far (in no particular order; via Leiden):

"Dr. Von der Dunk has served as adviser to the Dutch Government, several foreign Governments, the European Commission, the European Space Agency (ESA), the United Nations (UN), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Dutch National Aerospace Agency (NIVR), the German Space Agency (DLR), the Brazilian Space Agency (AEB), and the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), as well as various companies. Such advisory work dealt with a broad area of issues related to space activities, such as space policy, national space law, privatisation of space activities, Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) (in particular Galileo), satellite communications, radio astronomy, and earth observation."

"Dr. Von der Dunk was awarded the Distinguished Service Award of the International Institute of Space Law (IISL) of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF) in Vancouver, in October 2004, and the Social Science Award of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) in Valencia, in October 2006. He defended his dissertation on “Private Enterprise and Public Interest in the European ‘Spacescape’” in 1998."

"He has written over 100 articles and published papers, has given some 100 presentations at international meetings and was visiting professor at some 20 foreign universities across the world on subjects of international and national space law and policy, international air law and public international law. He has (co-)organised some 20 international symposia, workshops and other events, and has been (co-)editor of a number of publications and proceedings. As of 2006, he is the Series Editor of ‘Studies in Space Law’, published by Brill."

"He is Director and Treasurer of the International Institute of Space Law (IISL), Member of the Board of the European Centre for Space Law (ECSL), and Member for the Netherlands in the International Law Association’s (ILA) Committee on Space Law."

This is the Professor's most recent book. And here's a list of his main publications.

Lots more to come. For now, welcome to the States, Professor!

(Quick -- someone give the new Nebraskan a red football jersey!)

Wednesday walkabout - 9.25.07

2007-09-26T17:45:00.000-07:00

A few quick tidbits (which normally is the function of Friday Flybys, but alas, nothing is ever normal on this blog). . .

IAC update: A number of my sources over at the space summit in India this week -- who all seem to be having a great time -- confirm that the schedule, including that of the space law moot court competition, underwent a few last minute changes due to the huge 10-day Indian festival honoring Lord Ganesh (who, I like to think, would have approved of the space congress). Meanwhile, I did hear about a "spirited discussion... in the debris panel ['New Legal Developments in the Protection of the Space Environment'] regarding the possibility of amending the liability convention to allow for proportional liability for damage caused by unidentified debris." (See what we're missing?) I'm now awaiting news about the moot court final. (And as I've said, please, no wagers.)

Closer space: While space lovers in India contemplate the Moon and Mars, the Kerala government and the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) try to resolve a legal dispute over the purchase of land by ISRO for its space technology institute at Ponmudi.

COMSTAC: Back at home, here's the preliminary agenda for the Oct. 11th gathering over at FAA Headquarters.

Shana's blog: the deputy chief posts about NASA financial management and other "fairly dry" stuff. (For this she went to law school?) Shana quotes Boss Griffin saying, "all elements of NASA need to be healthy because a failure in financial or legal, among others, can be just as devastating to NASA as a program failure." (Yes, but you can blame the lawyers for those.)

Private property and the moon: If you can't get enough PowerPoints (and who can?) Klaus P. Heiss of High frontier has a PowerPoint from Rutger's Lunar Base Symposium last June. (Via HobbySpace)

Attention decabillionaires: John Tierney suggests "immortal glory" via Mars.

Treaty blues: John Hickman joins the crowd who want the US out of the Outer Space Treaty (The Space Review). A written response from Wayne White (who Hickman cited extensively in the article) will be forthcoming when Wayne's schedule allows. Stay tuned.

"The evolving role of law in aerospace activities" -- excerpts from Dr. Ruwantissa Abeyratne's interesting lecture at the Royal Aeronautical Society, Montreal Branch, delivered on August 3, 2007 at ICAO Headquarters, Montreal.

Galileo update by Jeff Foust.

Dirt rules: The California Space Authority seeks comments on the rules for the 2008 Regolith Excavation Challenge. Deadline for feedback is Oct. 1, 2007. (And here's my nephew Jake "Skywalker" Londin a few years ago practicing for this type of challenge.)

That's right, NASA is still hiring astronauts. Only those with the right astro stuff need apply. But be advised, according to a "key requirement" listed in the job posting, "travel may be required." (Lawyers help write these announcements.)

No, the meteorite that landed in Peru and reportedly made locals sick has not been sold on Ebay.

Speaking of making folks sick, please call a doctor not a space lawyer when microbes sent into orbit come back stronger and deadlier than ever.

That's all for now. ;)

* * *
IMAGE CREDIT: NASA. (Well I thought this untethered EVA more or less illustrated the Wednesday walkabout idea; just hang on tight to your "manned maneuvering unit".)

Space lawyers in Hyderabad

2007-09-24T15:43:00.000-07:00

नमस्ते. Greetings from SLP to all gathered this week in Hyderabad, India for the 58th International Astronautical Congress (IAC 2007).

The five-day summit, organized by the International Astronautical Federation, the International Academy of Astronautics and of course the International Institute of Space Law (IISL) (and did I leave anyone out?) -- all graciously hosted by the Indian Space Research Organisation and the Astronautical Society of India -- brings together delegates and seriously interested folks from all around the home planet to brainstorm about space interests -- business, technology, tourism, exploration and lots more. Which is just the sort of thing that will attract space lawyers galore.

Yes, I see a number of interesting space policy and law sessions in the extensive IAC line-up, just one example of which is this space tourism law panel which I previewed in an earlier post. Wish I were there.

For now, some initial news out of Hyderabad, where the summit is underway under tight security in the wake of last month's terror bombings in the city: Mike Griffin gave a speech outlining NASA's goals, saying in the centenary of the space age (that's 2057, if my math is correct,) "we should be celebrating 20 years of man on Mars." And India's Minister of State Prithviraj Chavan said his country is planning to conduct 60 space missions over the next five years.

As I've talked about, one of the main space law events, held in conjunction with IISL's annual space law colloquium at IAC, consists of the semi-finals and world finals of the 16th Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot Court Competition. Future space lawyers who have been researching, pacing the floor and sharpening their oral arguments all year will duke it out in real space-time in the "Case Concerning International Liability" (Emeralda v Mazonia); the semi-final will be held on Tuesday, Sept. 25th in a "closed session" at the convention center in Hyderabad. The finals will be held on Thursday Sept. 27th at NALSAR University of Law, and, as I've noted, will be judged by three members of the International Court of Justice. The case may be moot but it is major league.

And yes, for invitees only, the annual dinner of IISL will follow the finals.

I look forward to hearing from everyone who has promised me news and updates from India. ;) Meanwhile, have fun, all; and good luck, moot court competitors!

Lunar landing law

2007-09-21T19:00:00.000-07:00

Over on Slate, which is not an ABA-accredited law school publication last I checked, the Explainer channeled a space lawyer or two to briefly (in like, 450 words or less,) address the question, "Do you need special permission to land something on the moon?" (Short answer: "Not exactly." Which is pretty much exactly correct. Proving once again how easy it is to sound lawyerly.)

By the way, the Explainer got no hints (but earned a good grade) from the Professor.

Land safely.

Still studying space solar power

2007-09-20T19:58:00.000-07:00

Yes, folks love to talk about and study the concept of space solar power (or space-based solar power or solar power satellites or whatever you want to call it, take your pick). This has been going on for decades. But talk is cheaper than microwaves in space.

As Leonard David notes, space-based solar power has been the subject of studies by the likes of NASA, the Department of Energy, the European Space Agency and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.

Now it's the Department of Defense's turn.

But where is the final report from the National Security Space Office (NSSO) on space-based solar power? Good question. Over at the Space Solar Power public discussion forum (can I just call it a blog?) hosted by the Space Frontier Foundation to help with the NSSO study, director of the study, Col. (Select) Michael V. "Coyote" Smith, who is Chief of Future Concepts (love the official title; and I gather we can just call him Coyote) for the NSSO, updates us that his office will issue an interim report (not a final report) in October -- tentatively during a National Space Society event at the National Press Club on October 10th.

Coyote does "foreshadow" that interim report here. And one of the items he indicates the study will highlight as "requiring greater analysis," is: "Legal issues: Liability? Indemnity? Licensing? Frequency management?" Of course.

Coyote believes "broad international partnerships" are the way to go here. "First, to reassure the world that that space-based solar power is not a pathway to weaponize space. Second, to garner early support in the international community for additions and changes to space law, customs, and codes of conduct that will be required to make space-based solar power a reality. Finally, broad international partners will help industry find broad international customers to buy our energy product." Yup. More work for space lawyers.

Seaking of which, here is a white paper prepared for DOE by Carl Q. Christol entitled, Satellite Power System (SPS) International Agreements (Oct. 1978) in which he took an early look at international legal issues in connection with a geostationary space-based solar power system.

And if you think it's all international, here's a report by Allan D. Kotin on State and Local Regulations as Applied to Satellite Power System Microwave Receiving Antenna Facilities (also prepared for DOE, Oct. 1978). You'll burn a few watts reading through this.

Meanwhile, if you were wondering (as I was) why the Pentagon is so interested in space solar power, here is Coyote's answer (written on a napkin at a Washington D.C. pub, naturally), in which he specifies, "The emphasis throughout this study is that the DoD wants to be a customer of clean energy from space, not a producer." (But isn't DoD money a bit tied up? I hope they even afford to buy space power when it becomes available.)

With the business concept in mind, it's good to see some commercial thinking on space solar power at Google Lunar X Prize, which portrays the concept on its website this way: "Clean solar energy can be sent from space to the earth with solar collectors in high Earth orbit made from lunar materials. A single solar power satellite could power a major Earth city without CO2 or other pollution."

Yes. One day.

(Hat tip: Clark Lindsey.)

Launching new amateur rocket rules

2007-09-19T16:13:00.000-07:00

Countdown continues as FAA/AST prepares "to update our regulations and align them with advances in the amateur rocket industry," by promulgating new Requirements for Amateur Rocket Activities. FAA's period for commenting on this proposed rulemaking closed on Sept. 12th, and you can read all the submissions from folks who weighed in on the NPRM at DOT's docket management site -- and don't forget to type in the corrected docket number for this rulemaking -- 27390). All the folks with the right rocket stuff launched feedback. After all, for many this is more than just a weekend hobby -- space transportation industry leaders, among others, are forged in rocketry clubs -- so some folks don't mind taking the time out to talk to the government about regulations concerning these precious homemade boosters. I counted at least 30 comments, including of course from folks who keep a sharp eye on government action concerning hobby rocketry such as the National Association of Rocketry and Tripoli Rocketry Association (and it's good to see them addressing legal concerns other than the costly and explosive ACPC litigation with BATFE and instead talking to friendly FAA).

So why the need for new regulations? As our rocket regulators explain,

Historically, the FAA has relied on state and local regulation, voluntary self-regulation, and its own analysis to fulfill its oversight responsibility for unmanned rocket operations under [14 CFR] part 101. The voluntary self-regulation has been carried out by the organizations sponsoring these activities. When we amended part 101 in 1994, we included provisions for large model rockets. The voluntary self-regulation and state and local regulations were effective for purposes of protecting public safety for model and large model rockets. However, amateur rocket performance has continued to improve and participation in amateur rocket launches has increased significantly. Therefore, the once remote possibility of an accident or incident resulting from amateur rocket activities has become more likely. The FAA now believes these activities need regulation appropriate for continued safe operation. This rulemaking is intended to preserve the safety record of amateur rocket activities, address inconsistencies, and clarify existing amateur rocket regulations.

Provisions discussed in the comments included the information requirements for class 3 rockets; categorization of class 1 and class 2 rockets; the "within five miles of any airport runway" restriction (one concerned rocketeer, Jennifer Ash-Poole, said her club "has launched within 8 miles of Camp David, with a NOTAM, without any problems, even when the president was there"); other items.

And as we always say here on SLP, everyone who did not comment loved every word of the NPRM.

In an interesting late submission, which FAA/AST graciously posted anyway, Michael Aherne, who describes himself as having "worked extensively on these rules" while at AST and subsequently left for grad school, calls the comments "absolutely excellent," and includes in his comment a "summarized rewrite" of the proposed rule "incorporating all the comments I agree and disagree with." (Maybe AST should hire him back?)

Yes, amateur rocketry is exciting, It's outdoorsy, social, educational, and you get to say things like "ballistic coefficient" just to keep the lawyers scratching their heads. (And if you have technical questions as we await FAA's final rule, don't send them here, shoot over to Dick's Rocket Dungeon.)

* * *
IMAGE CREDIT: Alamogordo Rocketry Club.

UPDATE: By the way, I just added to my Netflix queue October Sky, a film based on the book about hobby rocketry, Rocket Boys. And here's some interesting trivia on this film, via Wikipedia: October Sky is an anagram of Rocket Boys. Apparently research by Universal Pictures found women over 30 would not go to see a movie titled Rocket Boys, so the film company "changed the title to be more inviting to a wider audience." [Hmm. I thought the title was a reference to the Sputnik launch. Well, in any case, as a "woman over 30" I'm just glad they didn't worry enough about me to change the name of Spider-man.--JL]

Got space law CLE credits?

2007-09-17T18:06:00.000-07:00

U.S. lawyers sure must be covering their continuing legal education credit requirements with classes in not so far out legal subjects like patent licensing, qui tam, the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act, hedge fund regulation, animal rights, anything but space law. I know I am. CLE space law courses and seminars remain rare. In fact, so far I've only had opportunity to blog about one, presented early last year by the Pennsylvania Bar Association's CLE institute, and it sounded excellent.

Well here is a bit of welcome news about a few more millennium-ready CLE providers currently adding space law to their repertoires:

CLE International has announced a new conference, Space Law: Beyond International Treaty Law (12 credits) taking place Dec. 10-11, 2007 at the Millennium Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles, California. The program will be chaired by Rachel A. Yates of Holland & Hart, and features an excellent panel of space law and industry experts. Topics include remote sensing laws and policies (yes, Prof. Joanne Gabrynowicz will host that panel), exports controls, space tourism, satellite regulations and issues, weaponization of space, new roles for NASA, lots more. School uniform optional.

Colorado Bar Association offers a full-day 6 credit CLE seminar on Aviation and Space Law, Nov. 15, 2007 in Denver (with video replay scheduled for Dec. 7th in Colorado Springs and other locations). Of course when air law and space law are linked on a program, traditionally air gets top billing and most of the attention. But among the panels on air crashes, corporate aviation transactions, environmental issues affecting aviation, etc., I do note a lone morning panel, "What's New in Space Law," presented by Rachel A. Yates.

By the way, continuing legal education is not for American lawyers only. I did not hear about this one in time to announce it but over in Sydney, Austria, the Lawyers Reform Association presented a space law CLE seminar in September 2006, which included Dr Michael Green, director of the Australian Government Space Licensing and Safety Office (SLASO) and other presenters. Impressive.

If you know of others space law CLE resource (webcasts, lectures, conferences, etc.) currently scheduled or in the works, send me a heads up and I'll post about those too.

And keep hittin' those law lessons. Enjoy your nonstop endless ongoing and continuing legal education which, to paraphrase Robert Frost, essentially consists of "hanging around until you've caught on."

* * *
IMAGE: Don't recall where I got this, but thanks to the artist.

Google Moon Money

2007-09-14T16:16:00.000-07:00

By now everyone has heard the way cool announcement out of Wired NextFest about the Google Lunar X Prize. The planet may look forward to the first privately funded spacecraft to land on the moon.

(Of course, at last year's NextFest when Virgin Galactic unveiled its mockup of SpaceShipTwo, the commercial spacecraft that will take humans suborbital, you could see that the robots running around the convention center were looking a bit jealous of the humans. This year at NextFest the humans might seem a little envious, since the Google Lunar X Prize will send to the moon only lucky robotic rovers....)

Alan Boyle reports on the prize; Space Prizes blog has this roundup; and Clark Lindsey considers some whys and why nots in connection with this exciting contest.

It's Friday so I'll link one YouTube promo video (approx 8:13 min).

And now that the prize is open and the news has orbited the globe (with official web sites in Spanish, Russian, French, German, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Portuguese and Italian), anyone even remotely interested in revving his or her moon rover in this competition has seen the Google Lunar X PRIZE guidelines which include the basics: "To win the Google Lunar X PRIZE, a team must successfully land a privately funded craft on the lunar surface and survive long enough to complete the mission goals of roaming about the lunar surface for at least 500 meters and sending a defined data package, called a 'Mooncast', back to Earth."

But here on SLP, before potential clients even ask, we think it's not too soon to start reviewing the black letter official rules. Or is it? Well apparently yes. The organizers have posted this note: "Official Rules for the Google Lunar X PRIZE are undergoing a formal vetting process wherein government agencies, space agencies, and the public at large will review and provide comments on the rules before they are finalized. Please refer to our competition guidelines." Oh. OK, we'll check back and look forward to commenting on those contest rules.

For now, go for it, lunar jockeys! We await your mooncast from somewhere near Tranquility Base. And to paraphrase JFK, we choose to go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard, plus it pays 30 million bucks. (Although you probably have to be Elon Musk to figure out how to make a profit from that. ;)

Satellite TV hacker fines limited

2007-09-12T20:10:00.000-07:00

I've been blogging at times noisily about satellite radio (not the programming, the merger), so for a change, here's a decision out of the Ninth Circuit yesterday for you satellite TV law buffs.

---------------------------------
Satellite TV Hacking Illegal But Not a $100,000 Offense, Court Says
(Wired, Sept. 11, 2007)

Users of illicit decoding technology who have hacked into DirecTV satellite signals are not liable under a certain provision of the Federal Communications Act that calls for hefty, $100,000 fines, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said section 605(e)(4) of the act cannot be charged against individuals who have altered or purchased reformatted smart cards to acquire DirecTV for free. That statute, the court ruled, was meant to financially injure companies that produce and sell such pirating technology and was not directed at end users as DirecTV alleged

"Congress intended to treat differently individuals who played different roles in the pirating system," a three-judge appellate court panel wrote in its 2-1 decision.

The decision, if it stands, could have widespread implications, as DirectTV regularly sues hackers.

Jason Schultz, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation that filed a friend of a court brief in the case, applauded the court's decision. "The court said the assembling and manufacturing prohibition is meant for commercial entities or other upstream providers, not for individuals who simply plug a card into a box to get TV," he said.

"You can't have this huge $100,000 hammer for individuals that was meant for businesses, and people making profits," Schultz added. "What DirecTV was arguing was that anybody who tweaks their access card is liable for up to $100,000."

Still, the court said the two convicted hackers in the case are still liable under section 605 (a) of the Federal Communications Act for unlawfully pirating television. Maximum fines per count are $10,000.

DirecTV did not return calls seeking comment and whether it would ask the San Francisco-based appeals court to rehear the case or petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review it.

In dissent, Judge Eugene Siler said the bigger fines should apply. The act, he said, "does not limit its application to manufacturers and sellers."
----------------------------------------------------------

Here is Judge B. Fletcher's opinion: DirecTV v. Huynh and DirecTV v. Oliver.

EFF also posted an MP3 of oral argument along with various briefs.

The statute at issue was section 605(e)(4) of the Federal Communications Act.

And yes, DirecTV's legal maneuvering in connection with this issue proved let's just say unpopular among many. EFF along with the Center for Internet and Society Cyberlaw Clinic at Stanford University Law School co-sponsored a website at DirecTVDefense.org "to help people defend themselves," saying, "People who intercept DirecTV’s satellite signal are breaking the law. However, DirecTV’s cease and desist letter campaign does not distinguish the legitimate users from the thieves." The help site argues that "legitimate computer scientists, technology workers, and hobbyists . . . are being harassed by DirecTV's no holds-barred slash-and-burn legal strategy."

Over at CNET News, Declan McCullagh applauded the ruling: "DirecTV faces setback in dubious antipiracy campaign. Good." I think he's right.

(I don't see a public comment on this by DirecTV. Will update if the company appeals; although getting to the High Court would not be too likely.... Meanwhile, here is the company's site for "information concerning criminal and civil actions brought by DirecTV against those who fraudulently obtain DirecTV programming...")

The last thing Rocketplane needs

2007-09-11T19:49:00.000-07:00

Building the space vehicles should be the hard part.

It is unclear how things are going on the technical side, but financially speaking, it's been a hard, bumpy ride, of late, for Rocketplane Kistler.

As Rocketplane continues "'working on possible cures' for the funding crisis" that prompted NASA to issue formal notification on Sept. 7th that the space agency would terminate the company's COTS agreement for failing to meet financial milestones, Rocketplane now finds itself smacked with a lawsuit by a disgruntled space tourism marketing company over, of all things, money.

I have not seen the complaint, but today the Chicago Tribune reports that Abercrombie & Kent, "which contracted to market and reserve flights on a planned suborbital space plane has filed a $3.4 million lawsuit against its partner" alleging that the rocketship company "has stopped all work on the project." (That would be RkP's XP vehicle project, not Rocketplane's K-1 business, which is what is at issue on the COTS side.)

According to the Tribune, "Abercrombie & Kent says it spent $1 million drawing up a marketing plan for the zero-gravity plane only to see Rocketplane Kistler's corporate board move in April to abandon the project, according to a lawsuit filed recently in DuPage County Circuit Court."

The Tribune (which couldn't resist the rather tabloid-y headline, "Space tourism in limbo, suit says") reports Rocketplane business development associate George French III "denied that the company has abandoned the project," and said, "We've been moving forward...." (Perhaps the "new configuration" of the Rocketplane XP reportedly to be unveiled at the X Prize Cup could serve as evidence of that.)

And French charged Abercrombie & Kent is "trying to weasel out of the contract." (I'm not sure if this was meant to suggest a counter suit by Rocketplane. In any case, apparently the contract included a mediation clause, or the parties had agreed to mediation, but unfortunately that option fell through although it would have been most advisable for a company trying to find money to build expensive space vehicles not foot bills for costly litigation.)

I'll predict this settles. But whatever happens in the lawsuit, it is a first. Indeed, space tourism appears certainly to have arrived as a real business if space transportation companies are wrangling over millions in fees with their space travel marketing firms....

Space law classes in Noordwijk

2007-09-10T16:10:00.000-07:00

Goede dag! While the European Centre for Space Law's (ECSL) 16th Summer Course on Space Law and Policy takes place this week in Noordwijk, the Netherlands (Sept. 3rd through 14th), here's a little something by way of consolation for those of us not there: a good selection of video presentations from last summer's program, which also took place in lovely Noordwijk, the Euro seaside resort known for its beaches and bulb flower fields.

Slides from the talks are included in each video. (Some of these presentations may seem familiar -- I've posted about this ECSL offering before, and it's definitely worth another go; click on the above video link for the full menu):

Bradford Smith, Alcatel: talks about intellectual property rights an the patentability of orbits and frequencies.

Jerome Bequignon, Directorate of Earth Observation of ESA: on the International Charter of Space and Major Disasters and disaster management.

Prof. Ray Harris, University of London: discusses earth observation data policies internationally.

Prof. Frans van der Dunk, University of Leiden: discusses legal issues in space tourism.

Dr. Jean Clavel, head of the astronomy division of the Directorate of Science Programme of the European Space Agency: not a law lecture, but a talk aout our universe and introduction to ESA's science programme.

Enjoy. There won't be a quiz later.

Friday Flybys - 9.07.07

2007-09-07T18:40:00.000-07:00

I'd love to sip a hot latte while waiting for a space flight at this cool terminal. (I couldn't tell from the designs released this week but hopefully there will be a Starbucks at shiny new Spaceport America. ;)

Flybys...

Spying begins at home?: Not so fast. After a hearing yesterday on "Turning Spy Satellites on the Homeland," chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) of the Homeland Security Committee, along with other irate-sounding lawmakers, sent a letter to Michael Chertoff calling for a "moratorium" on planned expanded domestic use of military satellite imagery by DHS's new National Applications Office until "the many Constitutional, legal and organizational questions it raises are answered." However the Wall Street Journal reports today a DHS spokesman said the "objections are unlikely to stop the rollout of the program next month."

Big brother and Big Boss?: Never mind domestic spying, how about super intrusive background checks? Twenty-eight personally offended scientists at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have brought a lawsuit against NASA in connection with purportedly ask-anything employment background checks. (Via NASA Watch)

(From our "Something better to do with satellites than spy on Americans" file)... Space radio merger tidbits: XM and Sirius this week certified they are in substantial compliance with the government's Second Request (under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act for you antitrust novices) (and that monster filing must have blown the last precious weeks in August big time for some poor young associates; Mel Karmazin estimated photocopying alone cost $1 million, which should surprise no one who's ever worked on a Second Request...); Former FCC Chairman Mark Fowler has a piece in The New York Sun voicing his support for the merger; while Congressman Rick Boucher (D-VA) sent his thumbs up in a letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. (Hat tips, Orbitcast)

Keeping it clean: Of course NASA and the Outer Space Treaty want to keep harmful bacterial on Earth, thank you. (Nature.com)

Drunk astronauts and other urban legends: NASA Watch covers this week's hearings in connection with the Astronaut Health Report, etc. In light of findings, Mike's assessment appears correct. As I've blogged, I did not believe the drinking stories in the first place and am no longer paying attention. (Hiccup.)

January 2009 and beyond: Mike Snead sets forth his ambitious ideas and goals for our nation's next spacefaring administration. (First thing, all candidates should read the The Space Review each week. ;)

NASA Deputy Administrator Shana Dale blogs about financial management at the space agency. (Via SpaceRef) And anytime Shana (who is, last we checked, still a lawyer) would like to guess blog on SLP, she is most welcome...

In light of yet "another unwelcome delivery of hydrazine from Russia" in Kazakhstan, (by the way sincere condolences from SLP on the loss of the Proton rocket and Japanese satellite) Clark Lindsey has a few words about ELV's.

A lawyer in Montreal wishes to be one of the first tourists to visit a space hotel. Go for it, counselor. (And yes, Fadi now knows I am a lady, not a "gentleman." Even if I must say so myself. ;)

Vogue: Who will be the first space lawyer to have his or her image included in Harvard Law School's Legal Portraits Online collection? I have a few suggestions... (Send me yours or forward them to Harvard.)

Space lawyer as president?: Um, no. But the Wall Street Journal's Law Blog uncovers this perhaps frightening fact about lawyers as leaders of the free world -- 25 of 43 US presidents have had law degrees. And after a bit of intrepid reporting, SLP can now confirm this: none of these individuals was a space lawyer. But the millennium is young.

(Further, Law Blog reports, the "three leading candidates in each party have law degrees and most have practiced law" -- that's Clinton, Edwards, Giuliani, Obama, Thompson, Romney. Again, not space law. Not even on TV. And what does this tell us? You decide.)

Have a great weekend, everyone.

* * *
IMAGE: Boarding soon.

ABA Forum on Air & "Other" Law

2007-09-06T17:16:00.000-07:00

It's time for the second of the two annual meetings of the inimitable and very sociable ABA Forum on Air & Space Law, this time at the Peabody Hotel in Memphis, Tennessee Oct. 3–6, 2007. As we recall back in February, forum members gathered in Washington, DC for their first annual meeting of 2007. (Yes this group is so hooked up it doesn't need Facebook.)

As we see from the agenda for Memphis, true to the name of the forum, as always, air comes first. Expect aviation focused keynotes, air law topics for most of the panels, and air industry types as sponsors, too.

On the bright side however, as is typical at forum gatherings famous for their quaintly lopsided air law to space law ratio, space is not completely shall we say lost in the clouds; we do find these two excellent panels devoted to, you know, the "other" thing:

Commercial Human Space Flight, moderated by Tracey L. Knutson of Knutson & Associates with Michael Gold, chief legal counsel of Bigelow Aerospace; Jeff Greason, president, of XCOR Aerospace; Laura Montgomery, senior attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel, FAA and Alex Tai CEO, Virgin Galactic.

And then, Making Money in Space: Issues, Applications and Law, moderated by Prof. Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz of the University of Mississippi School of Law, with panelists Rick C. Crowsey, president, Crowsey Incorporated; Pamela L. Meredith of Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger, LLP; Sa'id Mosteshar of Mosteshar Mackenzie; Franceska O. Schroeder of Fish & Richardson, P.C.; and William L. Warren, senior V.P. and general counsel of GeoEye.

Indeed, some top flight space folks there. (Since Tracey is leading the early space law panel, perhaps she'll be the first to mention that 2007 is the 50th anniversary of the space age? ;)

By the way, if you're around on Saturday, Oct. 6, take the bus trip offered to Oxford, Mississippi for a tour of "the Historic Ole Miss Campus" which of course is home to the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law. Perfect. (But don't try to apply for that research counsel position while you're at the Center because I think Prof. Gabrynowicz already hired someone. And she is picky.) The tour will also feature civil rights as well as Civil War history, a visit to historic home of writer William Faulkner, and, for fans, a college football game: Louisiana Tech vs. Ole Miss Rebels. (My money's on the Rebels. ;)

As to hope for the future of the ABA forum ... as we've said here on SLP, in the 20th century air law was cool; but in this millennium, space law will, you know, breeze right by it. Hold on to your helmets.

NYC Taxis Strike Over GPS

2007-09-05T15:53:00.000-07:00

That's right, in the middle of Fashion Week and the U.S. Open, NYC taxi drivers have mounted a two-day strike to protest a city plan to require GPS tracking in cabs.

As the New York Taxi Workers Alliance explains, complaints about GPS from some of our otherwise easy going, open minded and clearly tech-smart NYC cabbies, include new and completely uncalled for intrusions into driver privacy in that "GPS will automatically tell the TLC [New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission] where you were at what time, how many fares/trips per shift, when you’re off-duty and how much money you’ve made."

Outrageous. Tracking city taxis on public streets, in this day and age? Now how can a cabbie in this town take a nice detour (some tourists want a little extra sight-seeing with the meter running, right?), grab a nap, or do whatever else a hard-working cab driver does that's work related but absolutely none of TLC's business?

Well never mind the fashionistas and tennis fans slumming it on the subway today, let's hope the TLC and drivers get this dispute sorted out in time for the Satellite Investment Summit as well as SATCON taking place here in town next month. Lots of cabs will be needed, and by folks who like a bit of GPS with their ride.

Meanwhile, perhaps we should bring back those ol' horse drawn streetcars? GPS not included.

Nebraska Space Law Program to Liftoff

2007-09-04T18:58:00.000-07:00

Looks like the cornhusker state's space law dreams are coming true. The University of Nebraska College of Law's new LL.M. program in space & telecommunications law has gotten the green light.

As the University confirmed: "the program was unanimously approved by the Nebraska Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education. Earlier, it had also been approved by the University of Nebraska Board of Regents and the law faculty. Both of those votes were also unanimous. Finally, the American Bar Association has acquiesced to the program. The ABA approves only J.D. degree programs, but their acquiescence was required to ensure that the new program did not interfere with the College's current J.D. degree program."

Congratulations from SLP to the law school and Professor Matt Schaefer, director of the new program. Matt took a few moments via e-mail to give us some details; he writes: "We will begin accepting applications sometime in November for a first year LL.M. class beginning Fall 2008. Required courses in the 24 credit degree program include space law, national security space law, international law, telecommunications law, international telecommunications law, researching space law, and a thesis requirement as well.

Students will have the opportunity to take 3 elective courses as well. We hired Marvin Ammori, previously at Georgetown, as our telecommunications law professor. We are in the hiring process for additional space law professors."

And Matt says lots of good stuff and a new web site are in the works. Almost makes me want to go to law school again. I said almost.

Meanwhile, Matt also reported that the law school's first space law event in March, which included General James Cartwright, former Commander USSTRATCOM and now vice-chair of the joint chiefs of staff as keynote speaker, was "quite successful for a first year conference." He said selected articles from the conference will be appearing in the Nebraska Law Review and the journal Astropolitics." I'll look forward to those. And yes, another conference is on tap for the Spring of 2008.

More updates from Nebraska to follow.

For now, go space Huskers!

Call for Croatian Space Law

2007-08-30T18:52:00.000-07:00

Zdravo! If you missed the conference in Split, Croatia last week, Human Presence in Space, chaired by NSS executive director George Whitesides and organized by the Croatian non-profit educational organization Znanost.org "to inspire the next generation of scientists in Europe and Croatia, and to chart the future role of smaller countries in human spaceflight," here's a press summary of the interesting pro-commercial space event.

Along with the Croatian Minister of Science, Education and Sports, Dragan Primorac, participants included Greg Olsen, who along with cosmonauts and astronauts brought with them "a combined 415 days of space experience." Also on hand were future space travelers with either free dreams, or very expensive future flight tickets.

Why gather in Croatia? The organizers report, "Croatia, like many smaller countries, has never had one of its own citizens go into space. The country gained its independence from the former Yugoslavia in 1991. While the Soviet Union had a program to launch representatives of Eastern Bloc countries, Yugoslavia was a non-aligned country and so did not participate in the program.

Despite this, or perhaps because of this, there is substantial interest in spaceflight in Croatia. Croatia is a prospective member of the European Union, and one of the topics of discussion was whether Croatia might join the European Space Agency in the future."

According to the press release, one "hot topic" at the summit was "the lack of spaceflight regulation in Croatia, which could open up commercial opportunities for future space tourism companies operating in Europe, including zero gravity flights."

Students (and possible future space lawyers?) Tonka Burić and Lucija Bojkic, "presented a case study that showed that it was possible under existing Croatian laws and airspace regulations to fly parabolic flights." I'd like to see that in English. (For now, the study, Studija Izvedivosti Svemirskog Turizma U Hrvatskoj is available in Croatian only.) Tonka said, "Starting parabolic flight in Croatia would expand Croatia's international reputation for tourism. The market is there. All that is required now is the will."

And Per Wimmer, described as Danish adventurer, financier, and lawyer with four masters degrees who "bought tickets to fly to space with two of the leading space tourism companies, Virgin Galactic and Space Adventures," spoke about cool spaceflight training at the Gagarin cosmonaut training facility outside of Moscow and high altitude MIG flights to 80,000 feet. Not bad for a lawyer.

Wimmer "also described the international legal framework of space activities. He argued that the patchwork of treaties and agreements, including the Outer Space treaty ratified only a few years after the launch of Sputnik, must be expanded and that mechanisms for enforcement must be re-thought."

A video archive of the event is expected.

Meanwhile, best of luck to Croatia on its space tourism dreams. As to regular, on- ground tourism, the US State Department reports "Croatia's economy turned the corner in 2000 as tourism rebounded" and continued growth is expected. And according to a comment on travel site Lonely Planet, "It’s hard to imagine that Croatia was part of a deadly civil war because today the Adriatic Coast is possibly the most peaceful place on earth (aside from the annual Teutonic invasion, but the biggest danger there is skimpy bathing suits)."

Not so skimpy spacesuits next?

* * *
IMAGE: Tonka and Lucija talk about the future. And here's another picture from the symposium -- lawyer and future space traveler Pim Wimmer with the Croatian Minister of Science.