jump to navigation

Michael Listner, Sunday, 12-1-13 December 1, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
5 comments

Michael Listner, Sunday, 12-1-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2133-BWB-2013-12-01.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases
Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

Guest:  Michael Listner.  Topics:  Space law Review for 2013.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.

We welcomed Michael Listner back to the program for this space law review for 2013.  On The Space Show blog at the end of the summary, you will find two presentations uploaded at Michael’s request.  In the first segment of this 1 hour 57 minute discussion, Michael said it was a fruitful year for space law and policy.  He suggested that the paradigm changer was private space development, at both the state and the federal legal picture.  He talked much about the Outer Space Treaty (OST) which provides the legal basis for the U.S. to exercise control over its citizens launching anything to space anywhere in the world.  This subject came up in reference to Mars One and some statements Michael made regarding there wanting to go elsewhere to avoid Dutch law.  Michael explained how the OST presents the Dutch government with the same obligation for its citizens around the world as is the case with the U.S.  Michael then brought us current with the European Code of Conduct, current modifications, and the impact it might have on U.S. space entrepreneurs and launchers such as SpaceX.  He talked about how regulations get enforced as law & how they would make the voluntary code legally binding in our country.  We talked about the need to get an FAA launch license for private companies and how that might be unavailable depending on regulations and political issues.  For a government mission, there is no launch license requirement.  This point was stressed when using SLS for Inspiration Mars came up for discussion.

In the second segment (note we had a phone interruption so there was a short additional break though most of it was edited out), there were several email questions and comments regarding Tito’s recent Inspiration Mars congressional testimony and what it might mean for space law issues if the mission became a NASA project.  Allen asked a question about state law, specifically in California.  Michael explained the relationship between state and federal law in space matters.  During the discussion, Michael referenced many papers by different authors applicable to our discussion. Here are the links to those papers:  Henry Hertzfeld & Scott Pace: http://science.time.com/2013/11/28/hands-off-our-lunar-landing-sites-not-so-fast; National Space Transportation Policy:
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/national_space_transportation_policy_11212013.pdf; Established Practices for Human Spaceflight Occupant Safety www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/national_space_transportation_policy_11212013.pdf; Space Review article on commercial spaceflight self-regulation: www.thespacereview.com/article/2252/1; FAA decision: www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-12-02/html/2013-28405.htm.  Our guest talked about these items during both segments of our show, stressing the geopolitical component.  Near the end of the program, we talked about laws to protect the lunar Apollo landing sites and artifacts.  In his concluding remarks, our guest stressed the need to play by the rules.  Such rules may consist of state, federal, and international laws and regulations. Michael also talked about Bigelow Aerospace and his lunar cots like program suggested with NASA.

If you have questions/comments for Michael, post them on The Space Show blog. You can reach Michael through his website at www.spacelawsolutions.com.

Relationship of space law with traditional law

IAASS_D_Finkleman_Pres__COPUOS_Lazare1-TS

Michael Listner, Monday, 1-2-12 January 2, 2012

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
5 comments

Michael Listner, Monday, 1-2-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1681-BWB-2012-01-02.mp3

Guest:  Michael Listner.  Topics:  National and international space law issues including property rights, the Moon Treaty & more.  You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright.  We welcomes Michael Listner to the program to discuss national and international space law issues and related matters.  We started out discussing the new Austrian domestic space law and inquiring of our guest why we should take note of this Austrian law here in the U.S.  As you will hear from Mr. Listner, the new Austrian law relates specifically to the UN space treaties and plays a role in international space law.  Our guest wrote a recent article on this subject in The Space Review on Dec. 12, 2011.  You can read his article at www.thespacereview.com/article/1988/1.  Another interesting article of his you might value is in DefensePolicy.org from July 7, 2011 and titled “TCBMs: A New Definition and New Role for Outer Space Security.”  You can download it at www.defensepolicy.org/2011/michlis/tcbms-a-new-definition-and-new-role-for-outer-space-security. Our discussion then focused on launching country issues and liability, satellite operations in different countries and both the Liability and the Registration U.N. Conventions.  This discussion led us to talking about the European Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities and Michael updated us on the status of this voluntary agreement, both on the international front as well as here in the U.S.  Other issues discussed in this segment included space debris and the Draft Russian Chinese Treaty On The Prevention Of The Placement Of Weapons In Outer Space (PPWT).  We also talked about the Chinese GPS system covering Asia, its military focus, and Chinese geo political intersects.  Michael then introduced us to Transparency and Confidence Building Measures (TCBMs) as alternatives to treaties. This prompted several listener questions and comments about “so called” government transparency, the word of governments, and their effectiveness so far.  This was an interesting discussion, especially when I asked our guest for his personal opinion on these types of agreements.  Space tourism became a subject and we spent some time on the liability issues and the states that have passed liability protection laws for the space companies.  Jack from Virginia was listening and provided us with important information about the Virginia law which he largely authored and which has become a model for the laws in Florida, Texas, and New Mexico.  We spent the rest of the first segment talking about liability and space tourism issues. In the second segment, Helen asked if funding levels for NASA and space interests correlated to up’s and downs in space policy.  As you will hear, most policy is driven by politics, not funding levels.  There were lots of questions about the legality of the Moon Treaty and its applicability to commercial space, even Google Lunar X Prize contestants.  We fielded questions on lunar mineral extractions as well as messing with Apollo artifacts on the Moon.  We then jumped over to property rights and what this actually means regarding space issues.  As we were nearing the end of our discussion, I asked Michael if space law was largely an academic field or if it was becoming a career choice field in terms of practical application.  He said it was becoming more and more practical and more and more schools were offering commercial law classes.  If you have comments or questions for Michael Listner, please post them on the blog URL above.