Slides from a short presentation I gave at ECSL Young Lawyers Symposium on 24 March 2018 at ESA HQ in Paris, opinions and errors are my own

1. Space Object:
Development,
Evolution or,
Amendment?
Thomas Cheney
PhD Candidate
Sunderland University, UK
Thomas.cheney@research.sunderland.ac.uk
@thomcheney

2. Contents
• Why?
• Defining space object
• In-space or on-orbit manufacturing
• Moon bases and Mars cities
• Questions/talking points

3. Why?
• Asgardia
• In space manufacturing
• Moon Village
• Musk’s Mars Cities
• Registration and Liability Regimes

4. Defining
Space Object
• ‘Objects launched into outer space’
• Includes their ‘component parts’
• Art VII and VIII OST; Art Ib REG; Art Id
LIB
• “Space Objects may be defined as artificial
man made objects that are brought into space
and are designed for use in outer space.” –
Hobe, Cologne Commentaries

5. In-space or On-orbit manufacturing
• Object built in space not ‘launched’
• Or is it an ‘assemblage’ of ‘objects’ that were ‘launched’
• If materials were sourced ‘in space’ such as from an asteroid?
• Article VIII OST – “Ownership of objects launched into outer space,
including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body”
• Do these have to be ‘launched’ into space from Earth?
• Still open question re ‘objects’ made in space but not on a celestial
body

6. Moon Villages and Mars Cities
• Space objects remain under jurisdiction,
ownership and control of the state of
registry (Art VIII OST)
• In effect they are ‘islands’ of ‘sovereignty’
• Enables governance regime for ‘outposts,
settlement sand colonies’
• Potential conflict of jurisdiction
(ie persons vs objects)
• ISS model for governance though Art 22
not tested
• Art I and II OST issues remain

7. Questions/Talking Points
• Simply delete ‘launched’ from definition?
• Treaty amendment, customary development or soft law?
• Suitability of the ISS agreement model?

8. Image Credits (in order):
• NASA
• Thomas Cheney
• ESA
• Popular Science