Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Lord British Claims He Owns the Moon

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the enjoy-the-property-tax dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 144

An anonymous reader writes "Following the recent discovery of Richard Garriott's old moon rover, the man known as Lord British has laid claim to his own lunar territory. Moon dwellers, all hail your new overlord!"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Property Values (4, Funny)

necro81 (917438) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662436)

So if another probe lands in the vicinity, or roves its away across the supposed territory, would Lord British then have grounds to sue for ruining the property values? "Good Lord, man, look at what you've done! All those tracks ruin the pristine scenery!"

Re:Property Values (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662882)

Moon Battlebots, FIGHT!

Re:Property Values (1)

juliusbeezer (1558233) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663240)

I don't think he'd get far with that line of argument if British local authority planners were involved in the dispute. Ancient English common law traditions of land use have much to commend them, though I do not know if the potential for their writ stretches to the moon's surface or not.

Re:Property Values (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663632)

Yup. I guess 'Lord British' has never heard of enclosure. He'll have to build a fence around his rover to indicate the boundaries of his land.

Re:Property Values (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663950)

The moon is a sphere, so, from a certain perspective the volume of his rover encompasses the entire area of the moon except that inside the rover.

Re:Property Values (2, Interesting)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664482)

Then he needs to build a Dyson Sphere. ;^)

Re:Property Values (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665924)

It's not as if the British and their lords made a similar claim before?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabo_v_Queensland_(No_2) [wikipedia.org]

It's just the vibe of the thing.

Re:Property Values (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31666182)

The issue I have with native title is the fact that they all still claim welfare and other benefits given to the by the Crown. If they claim their land they should have everything taken away from them that living in a civilised society has given them, which is absolutely everything.

Re:Property Values (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664358)

Reminds me of the short story by Robert Heinlein, "The Man Who Sold the Moon" in 1950 and appeared later in different collections.

Re:Property Values (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664422)

maybe he should be charged a land tax, say 5 cents to every person in the world.

Re:Property Values (3, Interesting)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664630)

Simple. We declare, that as he now has his own land, he and that land, is a country. And that that country just declared war upon us.
*BOOOM*
Done. ^^

Headline. (2, Funny)

daniel.waterfield (960460) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662444)

As headlines go, this is into the 'warner bros cartoon' surreal territory. What's next? 'Lord British holds earth to ransom from his moon fortress!'

Re:Headline. (0, Flamebait)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662480)

Part of any legitimate claim in this regard would be the ability to occupy or defend the territory. Since this buffoon can do neither, his claim is invalid, almost as invalid as the neural capacity of any fucking moron who goes around being called "Lord British".

Re:Headline. (0, Flamebait)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662626)

Shhh! As long as he's defending his claim, he won't be making any more shitty, shitty games.

Re:Headline. (2, Insightful)

ZosX (517789) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663194)

Ultima IV and V were pretty decent. By Ultima VII the series was so overly self referential that I don't think hardly anyone but old fans would have enjoyed it. Ultima VII still did a lot of stuff that was really innovative then and even now, but was certainly more than a little campy when it came to plot. The ultima games haven't really aged all that well IMO, but are still a lot of fun. The Underworld games were awesome too. Most people seem to forget that Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs too. I would say that the influence of Lord British is still being felt. I don't think he is the visionary that Warren Spector or Peter Molyneux became, but he got pretty filthy rich off of those "shitty" games, and influenced a whole new generation of game development. He deserves credit for quite a bit.

Re:Headline. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662928)

It seems to me that he DOES occupy the territory. Or rather, an object he owns does. Which is more than anyone else can claim.

Defending his territory...well, maybe we'll find out, someday.

Re:Headline. (1)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665766)

I don't see how anyone can claim he hasn't defended his territory. Has anybody successfully attacked it? No? Then his defenses seem to be working.

Re:Headline. (0, Flamebait)

kaffiene (38781) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663162)

moron

Re:Headline. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31665500)

Don't be a dumbass. He owns the moon. I sold it to him to put under his moonbuggy. I will attest to the fact. I will also warn you that along with it went with several advanced laser and anti matter weapons. So don't piss him off with your reverse farting.

Lemme guess (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662622)

Actually, if I were to guess what next, it would be "Lord British accuses cabbages of conspiring to invade his lunar domain." ;)

Re:Lemme guess (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663228)

Have you not seen Red Planet?

The nematodes ate all the cabbage, and they destroyed his probe.

Re:Headline. (1)

elynnia (815633) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663130)

"Garriott added that his assertion is somewhat tongue in cheek."
-a less dodgy source [space.com]

Re:Headline. (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663784)

What's next? 'Lord British holds earth to ransom from his moon fortress!

I don't know, but if I see this guy, I'll be tempted to start an interorbital* war by punching the moon's ambasador. Not that I bear any ill will to the guy, just want to get into the history books.

  *I suppose I should learn what type of war I'll be starting, and this is probably a good place to find that out. What would that be called? I mean, besides assault. Intrasolar system war? Intertidal orbit war?

Re:Headline. (1)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663786)

Yeah. He's gonna be real pissed when Marvin destroys the Earth moon system to enhance his view of Venus...

moo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662448)

moo

And I'm a Duke of Sealand (1, Funny)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662456)

Re:And I'm a Duke of Sealand (1)

calmofthestorm (1344385) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662488)

If Sealand weren't common knowledge among nerden it would be a perfectly valid idle post.

Re:And I'm a Duke of Sealand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662982)

There is an actual Sealand btw....

Re:And I'm a Duke of Sealand (2, Informative)

Starayo (989319) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665186)

I think the real history [wikipedia.org] of Sealand is actually a little more ridiculous than uncyclopedia's page. After all, there was a mercenary war.

TFA (2, Funny)

gazbo (517111) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662464)

Who the fuck wrote that article? The spelling, grammar and flow would suggest it was a retarded foetus.

Re:TFA (1)

roguegramma (982660) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663394)

Well, the elegance of your wording will surely lead to some positive feedback.

Re:TFA (0, Offtopic)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665918)

The poor foetus was a lobotomite, you insensitive clod.

not the entire moon (1)

Power_Pentode (1123285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662472)

Actually, his quote in the article claims "...territory - at the very least around my rover and, potentially, along its point of travel". He does not appear to be claiming that he owns the entire moon.

This came up last time (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662486)

This claim may be new to the submitter, and to Soulskill, but not to Slashdot. [slashdot.org]

Re:This came up last time (1)

rockNme2349 (1414329) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663430)

My personal favorite part was the word ultra-ego.

Really, I didn't know you were such a coin-a-suer

His new neighbor... (2, Funny)

GPLDAN (732269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662506)

In other news, a man named 'Rainz' bought the plot next to British on the moon, and wondered if Lord British wanted some bread as a housewarming present.

Blowhard, or blows hard, your choice (1)

WillyWanker (1502057) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662540)

Since he can't hack it as a game developer anymore I guess he's got to do something with the millions he's scammed, er, earned over the years.

Lord British... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662596)

Wasn't he Captain America's sidekick?

Explorers stick a flag on new land (1)

joeflies (529536) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662604)

and that very same though was what goes through my mind why the space race went so frantically up until the point the american flag was planted in the moon, and since then, no other country bothered to go. I know that there are covenants that say such territory ownerships do not cover the moon, but they said the same thing about the Arctic Circle and that didn't stop Russia from making a territorial claim. Who knows, maybe they find oil or diamonds under the lunar surface and the US might just one day say "just kidding, we are claiming the moon as the 51st state".

Re:Explorers stick a flag on new land (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662938)

Claiming is one thing and actually exploiting is another. And most importantly, defending the claim physically is another thing still.

So, owning the moon, just as the arctic depends upon your ability to exploit it, while at the same time preventing anyone else from exploiting it.

Re:Explorers stick a flag on new land (1)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665822)

If the US manages to emplace enough population to let Luna qualify for immediate statehood, ahead of anyone else occupying the land, I'm not sure there's anything in the UN treaty excluding doing it. Claiming it as an annexed territory is one thing, having its permanent inhabitants petition for statehood is constitutionally very much another.
 

The Lunar Embassy might disagree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662684)

http://www.lunarembassy.com
The lunar embassy has been selling land on the moon for years. It may already be owned.

Not Bloody Likely (4, Insightful)

careysub (976506) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662700)

Garriott may or may not own a legal title to Lunokhod (it is by no means a given that the auction sale was a legitimate title), but there is no way buying Lunokhod gives him any ownership rights to any piece of the Moon, however small.

From http://www.space.com/news/soviet-moon-rover-space-law-100322.html [space.com] :

Validity of ownership?
Enter space lawyer, Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz. She is Director of the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air and Space Law and Research Professor of Law at the University of Mississippi.
"The soundness of a property right depends in large part on the integrity of the documents that memorialize the right," Gabrynowicz told SPACE.com via email. "This is why property buyers conduct title searches before buying property. They want to be sure that the title is good."
Gabrynowicz said that without reading the papers or knowing how they were processed and by whom, she can't speak to the validity of the ownership of a space object purchased at auction.
"However, a contention that buying a space object that landed on the lunar surface from a sovereign nation gives rise to a property right to the territory under it is wrong," Gabrynowicz said.
Gabrynowicz said that States-Parties to the Outer Space Treaty of 1966 cannot acquire lunar territory by landing an object on the moon.
"The USSR was and Russia is a party to the Outer Space Treaty," she added. "It did not acquire the territory under the object when it landed. One cannot sell what one does not own. Since USSR/Russia did not have a property right to the territory under the landed object, there was nothing to sell."

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662772)

"The USSR was and Russia is a party to the Outer Space Treaty," she added. "It did not acquire the territory under the object when it landed. One cannot sell what one does not own. Since USSR/Russia did not have a property right to the territory under the landed object, there was nothing to sell."

The treaty only applies to nations, not individuals who purchase something from a nation so I suspect that angle is pretty useless. I'm suspecting a better "he doesn't own anything" angle would be 1) the rover is non-functional or 2) owning a dead rover on the moon is like owning the wreck of a chevy impala on Mars, you'd have a hard time protecting "your" property from the first person who actually made it up there.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

careysub (976506) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663070)

The treaty only applies to nations, not individuals who purchase something from a nation so I suspect that angle is pretty useless.

All ownership rights arise within a system of laws - international law or national law (which assumes also an international legal structure that preserves national rights) . No national law can give him ownership, so you are asserting there is an international statute or legal principle that gives a private individual property rights possessed by no sovereign nation, and is in fact specifically denied them? Please provide information about this novel legal principle.

I note that you appear to be attempting to appeal to Earth-bound laws of salvage as providing authority that not only applies to space (I doubt any salvage treaty addresses this) but is superior to the Outer Space Treaty, which is the basic legal framework of all international space law.

I think you are being led astray by Libertarian philosophy that holds property ownership to be an intrinsic natural ("God-given" to the religious) not derived from legal frameworks, but superior to them. This is a political fantasy however.

The ridiculous nature of Garriott's claim, that owning an object landing on the Moon gives one ownership of its landing site, would mean that any rocket-building corporation could start staking claims to the moon by launching small artifacts on to its surface.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

GNT (319794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663738)

Well, not a political fantasy since the US did originate in the traditional fashion, which is homesteading, which in turn owes its pre-eminent exposition to Locke. So in point of fact, the superseding legal principle is controlling and advancing the value of the land in question, whether here or on Mars or the Moon.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

careysub (976506) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663918)

Well, not a political fantasy since the US did originate in the traditional fashion, which is homesteading, which in turn owes its pre-eminent exposition to Locke. So in point of fact, the superseding legal principle is controlling and advancing the value of the land in question, whether here or on Mars or the Moon.

Political fantasy - whether authored by Locke or anyone else. You do realize that Locke is not the basis of property law anywhere I hope? Homesteaders obtained title from the United States Government (or earlier from the King of the United Kingdom). Special acts of Congress (Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, The Homestead Act of 1862, etc.) were necessary to allow homesteading in new areas.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

Brian Boitano (514508) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663288)

Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz.... Space Lawyer!!

Re:Not Bloody Likely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31663516)

Didn't some company in Neveda try selling titles/deeds to the Moon years back? You know, I don't think any of those titles/deeds are going to be worth anything. I think true ownership will be when someone actually takes up residence or makes use of a given property on the Moon. No pointing and saying, "Hey, that there, it's mine!"

I'm not a lawyer, but common sense sort of dictates this, doesn't it? I mean, under whose authority will those titles/deeds be enforced? We're all here back on Earth afterall.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

QRDeNameland (873957) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664958)

Didn't some company in Neveda try selling titles/deeds to the Moon years back? You know, I don't think any of those titles/deeds are going to be worth anything. I think true ownership will be when someone actually takes up residence or makes use of a given property on the Moon. No pointing and saying, "Hey, that there, it's mine!"

I'm not a lawyer, but common sense sort of dictates this, doesn't it? I mean, under whose authority will those titles/deeds be enforced? We're all here back on Earth afterall.

If you google "moon property" there are several such charlatans out there. I had the same question the first time I saw that..."under whose authority?" The websites I looked at were very vague on the topic.

I guess the "common sense dictate" is this: if you buy "property on the moon" and think that it's anything other than a joke/novelty, you deserve to get ripped off.

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

Starayo (989319) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665224)

What?! You mean my several hundred square kilometres of moon land are worthless?!

Re:Not Bloody Likely (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663980)

space lawyer

Now there's a job title with a B-movie behind it...

Re:Not Bloody Likely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31663988)

So, at best, he might have an implicit easement [wikipedia.org] that lets him park his stuff on the surface of the Moon, which is otherwise public property (I'm thinking of this type [wikipedia.org] ).

At worst, he might owe a few decades of parking fees for leaving his stuff unattended on the commons. :-)

It's much simpler than that (2, Insightful)

raddan (519638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664728)

Most people around here are taking Garriott's bait and are picking apart the legal ramifications of his rover ownership, but it's much simpler than that. You own something if you can defend it. I.e., you have an army. Treaties are meaningless outside the context of force. Ever wonder why making someone follow a contract is called 'enforcement'?

And, because R.A.H. is taken as Gospel around here: the moon dwellers didn't gain sovereignty until they showed that they could pummel the bejeezus out of Earth. It turns out that it actually works that way in real life.

I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (-1, Flamebait)

Zaphod The 42nd (1205578) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662746)

Can we stop giving this guy attention? He's hardly worth all the celebrity and admiration he seems to be getting lately (and likely seeking for himself). He made a few crap games back when nobody knew how to make MMORPGs yet, and capitalized on it, made a fortune, and HASN'T MADE A SINGLE DECENT GAME SINCE.

Now just cuz his dad was a TRUE astronaut, he bought his way into space with his ridiculous riches and he expects to be looked up to? Going around on talk shows acting like he's the talk of the town?

Now THIS? Okay, I'm done. I never want to hear about Richard Garriot again. He hasn't done anything worth respecting.

Re:I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (1)

kronosopher (1531873) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663210)

Wheres UO2 dammit!!!?

Re:I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (2, Insightful)

corbettw (214229) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663290)

he bought his way into space with his ridiculous riches and he expects to be looked up to?

Well, if he's in space, then aren't we all looking up to him?

Re:I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (1)

Zaphod The 42nd (1205578) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665758)

touche

Re:I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (1)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665878)

Well, that depends.

If he is in orbit above the opposite side of the planet, we are actually looking down on him. Or when in the John we are even peeing down or poo-pooing down or .... you get the idea.

Re:I'm so sick of Garriot. ENOUGH! (1)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665420)

Even back in the day they weren't good RPGs. The ONLY thing they had going was that they were available on Apple II. That's it. That's the only reason Ultima sold a single copy. Ultima was a huge failure on all other platforms. People were so starved for software they'd put up with his lousy storylines and horrible interfaces. Oh, and you got a printed-on-cloth map. Of course, these were the nimnuls who were too stupid to spend less than a third of the money buying a Commodore 64, with it's far more impressive capabilities.

Sire (1)

enter to exit (1049190) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662748)

so will his peerage still be valid on the moon?

or will he discard the lowly earth titles and declare himself "King Moon"?

Let him eat cheese! (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662802)

(subject says it all...)

Can't believe he is being serious (2, Insightful)

KatchooNJ (173554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662848)

I guess I could be wrong, but I have a feeling he is kinda joking around when he made the cracks about having people pay to "park in his spot." I find it hard to believe that he is being serious about having real claim to any moon property (other than the landers, themselves). Am I the only one thinking he is just goofing off with such statements?

Guess he's a... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662852)

lunatic

The American Flag (0, Flamebait)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662878)

Well, if you want to place this game, the Lord can pound luna soil. The American's landed and placed a national Flag on the surface of the moon. So technically, it's property of the USA.

Disputed (1)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662886)

I'm pretty sure it's Eolas that owns all of the lunar intellectual property.

(We like da moon / and it is pa-ten-ted...)

Lord British can go suck a dick. (0, Troll)

Chas (5144) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662910)

'Nuff said.

The moon is owned by a chilean. Period! (2, Funny)

nomorecwrd (1193329) | more than 4 years ago | (#31662956)

Here is the proof!
in English [wikipedia.org] and Spanish (more complete) [wikipedia.org]

Don't argue with me about Wikipedia not being the total truth.

Poor Fact Checking in Article (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31662984)

Wow. No fact checking. Typical over-the-top-can't-get-the-facts-right journalism. The article tries to paint Lord British as laying claim to the entire moon, in the title, when in reality he's only even trying to claim at least the land on which the rover sits, and at most the land the rover crossed before it laid to rest.

The lawyer who was quoted when asked if he really owned the lander, is, quite frankly, covering her ass, as any good lawyer would do, when asked a question like that. What she says, that she can't determine if he owns it or not without seeing the title, is true. Any good lawyer would say the same thing if you called them to ask if you owned your house. They're not going to assume you do, even if you have been living there for the last 10 years. That would be borderline malpractice.

What Gariott is doing is, in fact, not nearly as crazy as it sounds. Since virtually every spacefaring nation gave up their rights to the moon in the Outer Space Treaty, any claims to the moon by right of discovery that could have been made by the US or Russia (as USSR's successor state) are void under international law. The treaty, however, does not contemplate private ownership of the moon. Gariott actually has a number of very very reasonable legal arguments that he owns a part of the moon. Yes, it does sound very strange to a lay person that he might have a "right of discovery" some land on the moon, since in the lay sense he did obviously not discover the moon. That said, legally, it's not unreasonable to say that he might. Nor is it unreasonable to say that he might gain the land through simply owning the rover on it long enough.

While the auction could not and did not sell him the land, this does not mean he can't own it. If no-one owns the land, then there are a number of legal ways to acquire it, as I've briefly discussed above.

The article, frankly, was clearly written by someone with no understanding of the legal circumstances around the matter.

Re:Poor Fact Checking in Article (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663420)

But do the international laws that cover the "right of discovery" actually cover the moon or any other celestial body?

And is there any piece of land on Earth owned by a private individual but not part of any country?

I hope he's just joking around... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31663064)

Last time I heard, there was an international treaty or something preventing countries from owning the moon, or the rest of the solar system for that matter.
Lord British (aka Richard Garriot) is a citizen of one of those signatory countries, and I believe that also prevents him from laying claim.
On top of that, the little understanding I have of settler or homesteading laws require that the person be on that land, and he has never been to the moon.
Trying to claim that you own the land under or near your 2nd hand space junk is kind of like claiming you own the land around a rock you threw into the fog.
Now as nobody has made any attempts at recovery of the lander I suspect international law allows a salvager to claim it, if they salvage it. (Not likely to happen anytime soon.)

Of course, IANAL, and this is all just my opinion based on the few things I've read on some of these laws, but still, let's get some sense in here.

Besides, everyone knows that the best lunar property is on the darkside. >^_^

I hereby claim ownership of Uranus. (1)

GravitonMan (1145905) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663106)

I hereby claim ownership of Uranus.

/all hail your Uranus Overlord!

Re:I hereby claim ownership of Uranus. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31663222)

/all hail your Uranus Overlord!

Sure, soon as I finish withdrawing out from the ATM machine to bribe the paid mercenaries to kick your asseous butt. With their foot.

Re:I hereby claim ownership of Uranus. (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663286)

Ow! STOP That!!!

What did I tell you? Larkin Decision! (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663144)

Last time this came up I joked about the Larkin Decision... I didn't think he'd really look into laying claim to Lunar territory.. XD

(Larkin Decision wouldn't actually apply, though - owning a piece of gear on the Moon isn't enough, you have to live there...)

Moon Town (2, Funny)

ink (4325) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663154)

I believe he was referring to the town [rpgclassics.com] in Ultima III, which he really could lay claim to.

Also, couldn't you visit the moon in Ultima II? My memory of that is hazy. I know Ronald McDonald was in it at some point.

vehicle ownership OK: but the parking spot? (1)

juliusbeezer (1558233) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663172)

No doubt he's bought the vehicle, but it seems like the ownership of the parking spot may still be contested. Still, I guess he's got a better excuse than most to mount a private space program so he can go and pick it up. In this instance, the moon artefact was bought direct from its owner, but it's also fun to think about the problems the delivery page would have caused eBay's programmers if it had passed through the used space vehicle market that way.

Geez (0, Flamebait)

kaffiene (38781) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663206)

You guys really need to learn to grow a sense of humour.

Not yet his... (2, Informative)

dissy (172727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663258)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty [wikipedia.org]

As a citizen of a nation whom signed that treaty, his government's law is still held over him, and the UK law (by treaty) is that no nation or person can own the moon, it is there for all of mankind.

Maybe possibly he could do so if he has his citizenship canceled (Is that possible in the UK? I know it is in the USA but obviously that doesn't apply here)

However with no citizenship to pretty much any first world nation with space technology, that will leave him out in the cold for trying to claim his property. He also stands a good chance of getting shot down if he did somehow manage to launch from a country that does not have a space program.
(ZOMG, is that an incoming ICMB?! better not take any chances, press the red button!)

Re:Not yet his... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664502)

No. It only applies to nations.

Citizens are governed by laws not treaties in most first world nations.

Idle stories from Britain... (1)

denelson83 (841254) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663318)

...should be classified as "Eric Idle". (gets crushed by a big cartoon foot)

Moonglow (1)

Samah (729132) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663320)

Well after all, Britannia does have the city of Moonglow... ;)

PUBLIC NOTICE! (1)

ryanisflyboy (202507) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663514)

I have purchased the entire galaxy known as NGC 1365. If you're interested in renting a planet, the price is $1.8M/month US. If anyone settles there without my permission, expect to be sued.

Further, I am leasing all the space between the Earth and the Moon. If you'd like access to the Moon, the toll will be set at $750,000 US each way.

For ownership verification please see the public records division on Alpha Centauri.

Thank you.

The Case for Lunar Property Rights (1)

bihoy (100694) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663574)

According to an article in Popular Mechanics [popularmechanics.com] from the June 2008 issue:

With the space race in full flower, though, the real worry was national sovereignty. Both the United States and the Soviet Union wanted to reach the moon first but, in fact, each was more worried about what would happen if they arrived second. Fears that the competition might trigger World War III led to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which was eventually ratified by 62 countries. According to article II of the treaty, "Outer Space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means."

Ideally, title would be recognized by an international agreement that all nations would endorse. The 1979 Moon Treaty was a flop, but there's no reason the space powers couldn't agree on a new treaty that recognizes property rights and encourages investment. After all, the international climate has warmed to property rights and capitalism over the past 30 years.

No way property rights are going to fly in space (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664216)

Thanks to the recent evolutions in IP law and temporary licensing, expect to see the same principles applied to space. (Most likely through a world-wide governance body of some sort created by treaty). You have have it as long as you're properly licensing its use....

Unless China wins... then we'll get cheap knockoffs of space available at Walmart and never need the real one till its loo late.

No! It's Mine, not His (1)

anorlunda (311253) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663612)

In 1967 I bought a square inch of the Moon for $1 from a street vendor in San Francisco; and I have the deed to prove it.

I keep telling him... (1)

KingOfTheMoon (1315575) | more than 4 years ago | (#31663772)

The moon already has a king.

What a luna(r)tic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664020)

... now get off my lawn...

He needs to move there to claim it (2, Interesting)

hobbes64 (1106381) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664150)

It is possible that someday a group of private (super rich) citizens or a corporation will make some spaceships and fly to the moon, build a lunar base there, and live there. It is possible for them to do it long before a government does it. That would be really interesting because they could reasonably claim the moon as theirs. The response of various countries to this claim would be even more interesting. I'll bet there would be a lot more interest in going to the moon right away to move out those squatters.

Re:He needs to move there to claim it (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664890)

That would be really interesting because they could reasonably claim the moon as theirs.

Not without violating international law, which prevents territorial claims on the moon.
 

The response of various countries to this claim would be even more interesting. I'll bet there would be a lot more interest in going to the moon right away to move out those squatters.

No need to go to the moon - simply stopping their supply flights will do the trick nicely.
 
No, producing supplies locally is not an option, nor is any other form of self sufficiency. That requires tech that's decades away at best.

Re:He needs to move there to claim it (1)

GastronomicalEvent (1401141) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665248)

New hosting for TPB?

Re:He needs to move there to claim it (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665332)

Not without violating international law, which prevents territorial claims on the moon.

Sorry, but international law is only valid on or around planet Earth. You are welcome to cite examples where international law has been applied and/or enforced outside of L1.

Re:He needs to move there to claim it (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#31666378)

You are welcome to prove that international law is only valid in or around the planet Earth. The numerous signatories to the agreements about the moon don't seem to agree with you. (Not to mention it's hilariously funny you'd choose L1.)

Thought this was a different story. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31664324)

Anyone else remember the rocketship in the original Ultima?

Planet orbiting Earth (1)

sheehaje (240093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31664858)

FTFA: "Last week, NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter found Lunokhod 2, sitting clearly on the planet’s surface."

First Pluto ceases to be a planet... Now the Moon is no longer a moon, but a planet... What is this solar system coming to?

Nice try, but... (1)

VampDuc (1540415) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665484)

Sorry, an Oklahoma City mayor already annexed the moon in the '80's.

Moongate (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31665590)

He's going to need a powerful moongate to get there.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31666008)

If the moon is his, do we have to pay to see the moon?

Which moon? (1)

dido (9125) | more than 4 years ago | (#31666212)

Trammel or Felluca?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?