Dr. David Livingston hosts me on "The Space Show", were we talk about the issue od "extraterrestrial real estate". The Space Show® focuses on timely and important issues influencing the development of outer-space commerce and space tourism, as well as other related subjects of interest to us all.
From Hurriyet, a Turkish newspaper, an article on "selling" the Moon (http://webarsiv.hurriyet.com.tr/2004/08/05/501230.asp):
"Bu yasadaki tek sorun ise şu: Bu kontratın altında bugüne kadar örneğin Pakistan, Fas veya Meksika gibi sadece on ülkenin imzası bulunurken uzay yolculukları yapan devletlerin hiçbirisi bu sözleşmeyi imzalamadı. Bu açıdan bakıldığında sözleşmenin hiçbir anlamı yok diyor Glasgow Üniversitesi hukuk uzamı ve Uluslararası Uzay Hakları Enstitüsü üyesi Virgiliu Pop. Ve uzay yolculukları yapan devletlerin çekimser kalmaları Ay sözleşmesindeki 11.maddeyle ilgili. Bu madde, sözleşmeyi kabul eden devletlerin Ay’dan yararlanma konusunda anlaşmalarını ve halihazırdaki tüm kazanımları de diğer ülkelerle bölüşülmesini öngörüyor."
2004, February 11th. Newhouse News Service publishes "Questions of Property Rights May Bedevil Private Ventures in Space" by Margie Wylie, after interviewing me - "But even if simply asserting ownership could make the moon Hope's, he is a Johnny-come-lately. Virgiliu Pop, a space law expert and lecturer at the University of Lille 2 in Lille, France, points out that between 1950 and 1970 alone, there were at least four other moon claims"
2004, February 8th. I am interviewed by Marcelo Córdova Silva, a journalist for the Chilean daily La Tercera. His article - "Venta de terrenos en la Luna y planetas cercanos se convierte en moda comercial" speaks about -
"Virgiliu Pop, investigador de la U. de Glasgow (Escocia) y del Instituto Internacional de Ley Espacial, dijo a La Tercera que lo único que se obtiene de gente como Hope es un trozo de papel que no da derechos de posesión. "Aunque la ley reconociera la propiedad privada en el espacio, Hope no sería dueño de la Luna. El sólo afirmó que la poseía, tal como alguien dice que es Dios o el Rey del Mundo", explica. Incluso, en 2001 Pop inscribió el Sol a su nombre en el Instituto de Registros Arquímedes para "mostrar cuán ridículo es decir que es mío porque yo lo digo. Si alguien dice que la Luna es suya, creo que debería pagarme por la luz que recibe de mi propiedad"."
Scott at amcgltd.com (http://www.amcgltd.com/archives/2004_02.html) writes:
"Space.com is carrying this detailed report on a business you probably don't know exists yet is amazingly profitable... selling lunar real-estate:
Every day hundreds of people fork over about $30 for 1-acre slices of the Moon and Mars. (Prices are going up: For roughly the same amount, prior to 2001, you could get 17,700 acres.) The cost includes shipping and handling of a deed, a map, and the lunar or Martian "Constitution and Bill of Rights," all printed on simulated parchment.
A lot of leftist back-and-forth about whether or not someone can sell chunks of something when there's nobody to actually buy it from in the first place. I particularly liked the blatherings of one Virgiliu Pop, a British legal scholar:
One precedent Pop draws on involves the Masai tribe in Africa, which "has a similar legal claim over all the cows in the world, yet in reality, people all over the world continue to buy and sell cattle without involving the Masai. What I dispute here is the 'it is mine because I say so' approach."
If the Masai were in charge of, say, the same resources as Germany we would take their claims far more seriously, probably devoting a whole section of the UN's world court to debate the matter endlessly while diplomats parked on the sidewalks of Manhattan and sent their daughters to Bloomingdale’s. If they controlled the resources of, say, the United States, we'd all be paying a cow tax.
Ownership of the moon depends a lot on whether or not there's anything on the moon worth owning. If it's all just dust and gravel, I fully expect some sort of high-minded international agreement along the lines of what works in Antarctica. If, on the other hand, a meteor blew the top of a mountain off and revealed, say, a gold deposit the size of Brazil, I fully expect it to be settled the old fashioned way... last one to the top the hill is a Frenchman!"
February 2nd, 2004, United States. I am interviewed by Robert Roy Britt of Space.com. His article, "Lunar Land Grab Celestial Real Estate Sales Soar" states, inter alia:
"In a crafty stunt designed to "expose the phony extraterrestrial real estate industry," British legal scholar Virgiliu Pop declared in 2001 that he owns the Sun and can charge the "owners" of other solar system bodies for the solar energy they receive. Pop has written several papers on space property rights and is a member of the IISL. "The Lunar Embassy does not own the Moon, hence it cannot sell it," Pop said in an e-mail interview. "If you still believe you can actually own the Moon by buying it from the Lunar Embassy, then you will have to pay me utilities fees for the Sun that I own as much (or as little) as Mr. Hope owns the Moon." One precedent Pop draws on involves the Masai tribe in Africa, which "has a similar legal claim over all the cows in the world, yet in reality, people all over the world continue to buy and sell cattle without involving the Masai. What I dispute here is the 'it is mine because I say so' approach." A cornerstone of Lunar Embassy's claims -- the absence of governmental protest -- is irrelevant, Pop argues, because no protest or response was to be expected "with such trivial claim" in light of accepted international law. Pop further contends that Dennis Hope's quest, which began in 1980, came too late. "A lunar claim was lodged in Chile back in 1953," Pop says, "and a Declaration of Lunar Ownership was issued by the city of Geneva, Ohio, back in 1966."
So why don't governments put a stop to all this? "Perhaps -- and this is my opinion, not the government’s -- this is because the government is concerned right now with more important issues," Pop said. "Yet, I hope one day the government will pay attention to the Lunar Embassy’s antics."
Robert Roy Britt's article appears also on MSNBC under the title "Could lunar real estate spark a future war?"
Radio Timisoara's Simona Pele hosts a 35-minute long interview with me on the show "Cap de Afis", where we discuss about the issue of extraterrestrial real estate.
I published this article on spacedaily.com -
The new space policy of the Bush administration, aimed at taking the humankind back to the Moon and on to Mars, came under fire before even being released. In their bid at the Democratic nomination for the White House, several politicians criticized George W. Bush's grand space plans, arguing that the money would find a better use here, on Earth.
"I also want to explore planet Earth and planet D.C.," Dennis Kucinich said. Al Sharpton too suggested that Bush instead try to discover the lower-income parts of Washington. "I mean, it won't cost as much ... and it would be just as enlightening for him".
Joseph Lieberman stated that the money would be needed "right here on Earth to give health care that's affordable to ever! Ybody, to improve our education system, and do better on veterans' benefits and homeland security". And Howard Dean agreed that "space exploration is terrific", but went on to ask – "Where is the tax increase to pay for it? It is not worth bankrupting the country."
Since the beginning of the space era, it has been argued that the money spent on space exploration should rather be used on meeting the needs of the underprivileged. "If our nation can spend … twenty billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God's children on their own two feet right here on earth." – were stating respected figures like Martin Luther King Jr.
People like him were not necessarily opposing space exploration; they were instead disputing the priorities – is space exploration worth pursuing when money is so badly needed elsewhere? Unfortunately, the benefits of the space exploration are not self-evident, no matter how real they are. And people are genuine in their worry that money is being wasted in space. Their concern with spending priorities needs to be addressed.
The high profile of space exploration makes it appear more expensive than it actually is. The uninformed, yet caring citizen, is under the earnest impression that the money would make a genuine difference in the fight against poverty. The real dimensions of the social needs are, in reality, out of proportion with the money spent in space – be it in the past, now or in the immediate future. Otherwise, there won't be any social needs left after the Congress stopped funding the Apollo missions to the Moon.
In the same time, many of the critics of the space programme on social grounds are "limousine liberals". They point the finger at the US government for wasting their tax money in space instead of helping the poor, but they are not feeling guilty for their own consumerist life style and for their own scale of priorities.
For instance, this year, total pet-related sales in the United States are projected to be $31 billion – the double, almost to the cent, of the $15.47 billion NASA budget. An estimated $5 billion worth of holiday season gifts were offered – not to the poor – but to the roving family pets – six times more than NASA spent on its own roving Martian explorers, Spirit and Opportunity, who cost the American taxpayer $820 million both. Instead of providing a launch pad for the immorally expensive shuttles, Florida can do better and clothe the underprivileged - a genuine alligator pet collar cost only $400 a piece.
Are space rockets expensive toys for the big boys? In any case, they cost less than the $20.3 billion a year spent in the US on the human popular toy industry. One doesn't need toys to play with when the most popular game is playing deaf and blind to the needs of the poor – provided one criticizes the waste in space.
Instead of betting on the future, Americans spend $586.5 billion a year on gambling. It is perhaps immoral to criticize one's personal choice, so instead of kicking the habit and feeding the poor with this money, one should stop instead the enormous waste in space who stands at a scandalous amount of 40 times less than gaming tokens.
Speaking about personal choice, $31 billion go annually in the US on tobacco products - twice the NASA budget -, and $58 billion is spent on alcohol consumption -almost four times the NASA budget. Forget space spin-offs – here are genuine tangible benefits: $250 billion are spent annually in the US on the medical treatment of tobacco- and alcohol-related diseases - only sixteen times more than on space exploration.
In the eve of the launch of Apollo 11, a moving event occurred at NASA's moonport. Reverend Ralph Abernathy, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and heir to Martin Luther King Jr., came to Cape Canaveral together with several hundred members of the Poor People's Campaign, to protest the money being spent on space exploration, while so many people remained poor.
He was met by Thomas Paine, the administrator of NASA, who was informed that in the face of such suffering, space flight represented an inhuman priority and funds should be spent instead to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, tend the sick, and house the homeless.
Paine enlightened the good reverend that the advances in space exploration were child's play compared to the tremendously difficult human problems of the society, and told him that "if we could solve the problems of poverty by not pushing the button to launch men to the moon tomorrow, then we would not push that button."
Here are $976.3 billion dollars – almost a trillion - spent every year in the US on pets, toys, gambling, alcohol and tobacco. It is 63 times the amount spent on space exploration – with the difference that NASA has not destroyed lives as the alcohol, tobacco and gambling did. It is not the exploration spirit that Americans need to give up in order to alleviate poverty. It is the consumerist spirit.
Instead of not pushing the button, why not kick the habit?
I published this article on spacedaily.com: This week, members of the international space community come together at the Waikoloa Beach Marriott Hotel in Hawaii, the venue of the International Lunar Conference 2003. Among many topics addressing humanity's return to the Moon, one session is dedicated to the issue of lunar property rights, with the commendable intention to find out "Who Owns the Moon".
For the past few years, I have been trying as well to come out with an answer to this question. Trust me - it is not an easy, straight forward task; it would take a whole doctoral thesis to analyse all the aspects of this topic. It is far easier to debunk the fairy tale that the Moon is owned by one Dennis Hope.
In order to do so, we should first take an imaginary trip to the homeland of the Masai. The tall, red-robed tribesmen are the most scenic people of Eastern Africa. Leading a traditional way of life, they have few possessions. But they believe that, by divine command, all the cows in the world belong to them, even though some may have temporarily found themselves in the possession of others. When the Masai raid their neighbours and seize their cows, they are vindicated by their legal system: they are simply returning the cattle to their rightful owners.
The cows in Africa, the cows in Europe, the cows grazing in the fields of Texas, the calf just born this minute in India - they are all the property of the Masai. Your own cow, or what you thought to be your own cow, is not yours. It belongs to the Masai. So they say.
Just like the Moon and the eight uninhabited planets of the solar system together with their own moons belong to Mr. Dennis Hope. So he says. And asteroid Eros belongs to Mr. Gregory Nemitz. So he says. And the Sun belongs to me. So I say since 2001, when I claimed its ownership in front of a computer, in order to show how ridiculous this approach is.
As a specialist in extraterrestrial property rights, I do not necessarily oppose the idea of property rights in outer space, as I do not oppose cattle ownership. The main issue I dispute, is the "it is mine, because I say so" approach - be it in its bovine or lunar form. If a claim alone would entail ownership, this would entitle the Masai to universal cattle ownership. Yet, in reality, people continue to buy and sell cattle without involving the Masai, regardless of what the latter believe.
In a paper I published in Space Policy, I outlined the necessity of a physical act of appropriation for the formation of property rights, a simple act of the mind being insufficient on its own. I also stated that should Dennis Hope manage to land a claim on the Moon, then and only then might he show evidence of corpus possidendi in support of his claim, although at that time further legal problems will need to be discussed, such as its extent and its validity in the light of the Outer Space Treaty's non-appropriation principle.
Mr. Hope is nowadays one step closer to that requirement, planning to send his Registry Archive to the Moon with what appears to be TransOrbital's Trailblazer mission. But the Trailblazer mission is open to everybody, not only to the Lunar Embassy, and in exchange for $16.95 I can send my own concurrent claim to the Moon, or any other message like "I am the king of the Moon", or "Good luck Mr. Gorsky".
From a legal point of view, sending one's claim to the Moon would no doubt enhance it, but, at the very best, its effect would be limited to a pint-sized lunar plot. And it remains the question of compatibility with the Outer Space Treaty, together with the fact that Mr. Hope claims to own more celestial bodies than the soon-to-be-impacted Moon.
According to the Lunar Embassy website, "one can become the legal owner of an extraterrestrial body, if you are the first one that claimed it, and that is the Lunar Embassy". While the first statement is legally inaccurate, the second statement is factually inaccurate. The Lunar Embassy is not the first entity to have claimed the Moon. If wolves and dogs have howled at it since time immemorial, many actual claims precede Dennis Hope's one, dating from 1980.
Take, for instance, the "Elves', Gnomes', and Little Men's Science Fiction, Chowder, and Marching Society" - a Berkley science fiction fan club. In February 1952, they notified both the United Nations and the United States President about their claim of a triangular lunar area in Mare Tranquilitatis. It was a "publicity gag" intended to boost their reputation in the Bay Area; instead, it made the headlines across the globe. Their claim did not go however unchallenged; the objection came from one Alexander F. Victor of the Monterrey peninsula, who informed the Little Men that they couldn't make a claim on the Moon - because he already owned it…
In 1953, an independent claim - this time for the whole of the Moon - occurred in Chile. Jenaro Gajardo Vera, a lawyer in Talca, was elected director of a local social club. Having received one negative vote on the grounds he did not posses any significant fortune, Gajardo noted there was an important material good no-one else has previously claimed: the Moon. In accordance with Chilean law, he published his lunar claim in three issues of the "Diario Oficial" - the Chilean Official Journal - with no opposition to his deeds. This earned him the apologies from his opponent, who conceded having learnt an important lesson.
The story goes that the Chilean authorities sent Internal Revenue inspectors to Gajardo's residence in order to collect taxes for being the owner of the Moon. Gajardo is said to have agreed, on the condition that the inspectors first visit his extraterrestrial property, measure and appraise it.
Another anecdote relates about Gajardo receiving in May 1969, prior to the first lunar landing, a telegram from US President Richard Nixon delivered by a US Embassy representative: "On behalf of the people of the United States, I request your authorization so that astronauts Aldrin, Collins and Armstrong may land on the satellite that belongs to you". As a note, no crew of three was ever meant to actually land on the Moon… Gajardo's will stipulates, inter alia: "I leave to my people the Moon, full of love for its sorrows".
1955 saw Robert R. Coles, former chairman of New York's "Hayden Planetarium", incorporating and selling lots on the moon for one dollar per acre - confident that no one else had claimed the Moon.
On April the 6th, 1966, in celebration of a century from the incorporation of the city of Geneva, Ohio, 35 representatives of its citizenry signed a "Declaration of Lunar Ownership". Emulating the US "Declaration of Independence", the document avows: "When in the course of human events and space-age accomplishments, the destiny of mankind becomes influenced … [by] the presence of a particular controversial Celestial Body unclaimed and unregulated … it should be advisable and honourable … to lay definitive and prior claim to the entire physical mass and any and all aura, aspect, imaginative or otherwise, of … the Moon".
The Ohio conurbation consequently assumes "full possession and complete responsibility" of the Moon, and "bows to no man or State in its sovereign right so to do". The document provides for the sale, rent or lease of the visible lunar face "to desirable applicants upon a two-thirds vote of the entire population of Geneva", granting the US Government "prior option to this privilege". For the year 1966, the document allows the sale of 100 deeds "for the sum of $100 describing 100 acres from Mare Umbriam"; "[t]he possessor of this deed shall have it to hold, his heirs and assigns forever and unencumbered."
And the story could go on and on. What matters is that Mr. Hope's is not the sole lunar claim, and is by no means the first one. If I recall well, science fiction author Orson Scott Card once wrote - "You all think you own the moon, just because you never see anybody else looking at it".
The most logical question one could ask would be - if Mr. Hope's is just one of the many claims, and not even the first one, why do all the people "buy" lunar plots from him, and not from Chile, from Geneva, Ohio, or from the Hayden Planetarium? The answer has nothing to do with the alleged lawfulness of Mr Hope's claim, but with the advent of the Internet and with Mr. Hope's marketing genius in taking advantage of this new means of communication. His claim was made back in 1980, but the business did not take off until the mid '90's, when his website came online. In contrast, the old claimants did not have the internet at that time, so their ventures never really took off.
Having mentioned the net, those in search of entertainment may have come upon a web site operated by Digital Minds. On Buyuranus.com, one can have a laugh by "purchasing" anything "from the rings of Uranus to the gases deep inside Uranus", or even one of the "big, fat moons of Uranus, after all, what good is Uranus without a good moon occasionally?"
The potential buyer is motivated by an existential question: "Can you afford not to own Uranus?" - and by the scatological humour of Digital Minds, founders of R.E.C.T.U.M. (Real Estate Commission & Trust of Uranus Management), the registry for the "Uranus Deed Registration". Unlike Dennis Hope's Lunar Embassy, Digital Minds know their law; in the website disclaimer, they acknowledge that -
"BuyUranus.com is a novelty site operated for entertainment purposes only. All of the merchandise for sale on this site is only for entertainment and holds no value other than it's entertaining nature. Digital Minds in no way claims that when you buy a piece of Uranus that you have any legal claim to that little piece of the Solar System unless you go up there and put a fence around it personally......"
Their approach is not based on deception, but on pure sense of humour (most of the people pronouncing the name of the seventh planet rear-end like), and the buyer knows that he or she would simply buy a piece of paper with no other value than a good laugh. This is instead of being conned into believing that he or she actually owns that extraterrestrial property, like the Lunar Embassy does when stating that a "novel gift" -
"does not diminish the value of the property that you purchase in any way, as every deed is recorded and registered in the Lunar Embassy's registration database and every owners information is listed with that registration. You own this property."
Should the Lunar Embassy adopt the buyuranus.com method, and stop conning people into believing it actually owns the Moon and the planets, it would still remain the leader of the "extraterrestrial real estate" industry given the already existing publicity, and people would still buy funny pieces of paper for a laugh, this time in full knowledge of the facts. Hopefully, this would also dissuade the Masai from claiming the Taurus constellation as their own.
To Kevin and Will
The sun was setting in Zululand. On the dusty road, a traveler was approaching a small village. In the twilight, its straw roofs seemed like gold - yet nothing was further from the truth, for its villagers were paupers.
-Good evening - said the traveler as he approached a hut. My name is Wernher, and I think I lost my way. May I spend the night as your guest?
- Sawubona - said the villager. I am Malusi; you are welcome in my house - but it won’t be too comfortable for a Mzungu, for the roof is broken, you can see the moon through it!
- I love the moon - smiled the man. In fact, that is what I do for living. I build rockets that go up there, and one day we may even go to Mars!
- The Moon and Mars have been above us yesterday - said Malusi. They will be above us in a thousand years. But, my family won’t last many years. We are hungry and ill – wouldn’t the money you burn in the sky be better spent here, on earth?
Wernher felt embarrassed. Maybe Malusi was right. Maybe space exploration wasn’t such a good idea when other people haven’t got a roof above. He promised to convince his government that what they were doing is wrong, and that he’ll return one day with food for Malusi’s people.
The sky has already darkened when Malusi saw two people approaching. He greeted them, and offered them hospitality - for they seemed tired from carrying a giant bird.
- My name is Wilbur, and I thank you for your kindness. My brother and I need a rest indeed, for tomorrow we shall try to fly. This thing of wood and cloth will carry us to the sky, where only the birds dare.
Malusi approached the device, and said: It is an amazing thing indeed - but with the materials for your bird, I could cover my broken roof, and make enough bows and spears for all the villagers to hunt. We are poor, and hungry. Isn’t this bird a waste of useful stuff?
- Wilbur is my brother - replied Orville - and so are you. We never realized that, instead of trying to fly like the birds, we should rather help others walk in dignity on the ground. Thank you for opening our eyes.
In the shadow of the night, Malusi could distinguish the approaching silhouette of a man.
- Sawubona - said Malusi - and welcome to my village. Will you be my guest for the night?
- Thank you - replied the traveler - but I am in a hurry. I am a painter - said he, pointing towards his canvas - and tonight is a beautiful night, and I feel so inspired, I need to paint it. Don’t you think the stars are amazing tonight? And by the way, my name is Vincent.
- Yes, the stars are beautiful - conceded Malusi. But so is my daughter Lindiwe. And, while the stars clothe themselves with the mantle of the sky, my daughter hasn’t got much to put on. I beg you, sir, those pieces of cloth - may I make a dress for Lindiwe out of them?
Vincent turned towards the man. He no longer saw the stars above. Instead, he saw them reflected in Malusi’s tears. There was a starry night, inside a pair of starry eyes. He could only care.
It was almost morning when Malusi received the visit of another drifting traveler. His name was Galileo - he said - and he was an astronomer. He was carrying a strange pipe - he called it a “telescope” - and he was claiming that through it he can see the skies closer.
-I am an old man - said Malusi - and my eyes are no longer good. May I have those pieces of glass inside that pipe so that I can better see my way?
Galileo was moved. His world capsized. At the end of the day, he realized that the Earth was indeed the centre of the Universe.
All over the world, inspired by the examples of Wernher, Wilbur, Orville, Vincent and Galileo, people understood that, instead of looking above, they should rather look around themselves. And, having to keep their eyes permanently open to the material needs of the others, they lost the ability to dream.
Virgiliu Pop
Lille, November 15th, 2003
Posts
All Comments
