Google bought the MOON!

by 10 replies
12
Yeah, well Google haven't bought the moon but can they?

My flatmate and I, have just been discussing the property rights of stars and planets and we were discussing whether or not a company could actually purchase the moon or claim the moon was theirs.

Who claims the moon?

I do find it interesting that people can purchase stars but no one has yet tried to purchase a planet (as far as I know).
#off topic forum #bought #google #moon
  • For all we know aliens already own the Earth.
  • Is your Wikipedia broken?

    Outer Space Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • [DELETED]
  • Google already grasp the earth via Google Earth. May be in the future Google will make Google Moon.
  • well,what the point having Moon if you cant have full control on it, anyway if Google has moon how will Google get return, will Google charge pay per view for something that only God has full control with it ?
  • Stars are totally worthless as far as anyone knows(I mean do we know if there is occupyable territory or really any way to harvest anything, and HOW?), and certainly NOW, so people have only bought the "right" to NAME them.

    The MOON is more involved because it has been named, and parts have been named. As I recall, a company DID effectively lay claim to the moon of sorts, and start selling space on it. I THINK they even won a court case on a technicality.

    STILL, of course, the traditional way to name a star is to be the first one on record to discover it, and the traditional way to name a piece of land and/or lay claim to it has been to control it for some period of time through occupation OR, if in a country, through the local laws. SO, by THAT measure, NOBODY could own the moon, because nobody has satisfied that, so nobody could sell it. Merely placing a flag there doesn't count and usually such ownership is given up if there is an abandonment.

    The company that was selling moon parcels was the same one, as I recall, that was selling stars, and I think a good part of their case was that they wer naming it through registration of a copyright or some such.

    That space treaty doesn't even cover private ownership. It merely makes it clear that no government is to lay private claim to it, or use it for hostile purposes. OF COURSE, if they use it for PEACEFUL purposes, they would likely consider that SOVEREIGN for its use, etc... I mean if the US setup some public transmitting station to allow better communication with another planet, or some station to track the moons movements or activity there, do you REALLY think russia would tear it down, etc... How would the US react if they DID!?!? AND, if a private person setup a camp, do you REALLY think a nation would violate that? They would AGAIN, technically be violating the treaty.

    So there HAS to be SOME right to ownership to use the moon AT ALL!

    Steve
    • [1] reply
    • buy the moon from whom?...in order to buy it somebody has to actually posses it...
      • [1] reply
  • How can someone buy a moon? WHo does the money go to? I don't think people should be buying up planet/moons/stars!!!hahahaha
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [1] reply
    • Nobody. In international law, the principle of common heritage applies to the Moon (and the other planets/moons in the Solar system). Simply put, that means no one State can claim sovereignty over it/them.

      As for private ownership, the Outer Space Treaty says that the activities of "non-governmental entities" in space require the authorisation of the relevant State that is party to the Treaty, which will then assume responsibility for their actions. For that reason, no private claim could ever be legitimised (since no State could approve the activities of whoever made the claim without violating the Treaty).

      Any State that launches a spacecraft (or builds a space-station or planetary installation) retains jurisdiction over it (and is liable if it causes damage to a spacecraft launched by any other State). For that reason, unless it was at war with the US, Russia wouldn't attack an American communications or tracking station on the Moon. However, if the Russians believed the American installation could somehow interfere with their space-based activities, the Treaty does give them the right to be consulted about it.

      If, however, the same communications or tracking station was found to be of a military nature, then it would be a Treaty violation, and the Russians would be justified in attacking if they believed it was a threat to their national security.

      Interestingly, both the U.S. and the Soviet Union had plans to put nuclear weapons on the Moon. It would have been the ultimate deterrent. The first strike capability of the other side would have been rendered useless: If you wipe out your enemy on Earth, a counter-attack is launched from the Moon and you get annihilated from space a few days later. However, if you try attacking the Moon first (or at the same time), they can see you coming for several days and have plenty of time to respond. MAD in it's ultimate form!

      In the (very) long term, if the moon is ever colonised on a large-scale, I, personally, think we'd eventually see the emergence of Moon-based political movements and, ultimately, a bid for independence from Earth. Perhaps the first real "space war" will see Earthmen and Moonmen blowing the bejesus out of each other in orbit!
  • yes they will lol
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 12

    Google bought the MOON!

    Yeah, well Google haven't bought the moon but can they? My flatmate and I, have just been discussing the property rights of stars and planets and we were discussing whether or not a company could actually purchase the moon or claim the moon was theirs.