Annotated Bibliographical Entries:

Source:  

                Hertzfeld, H. R. (2005). Bringing space law into the commercial world: Property rights without sovereignty. Chicago Journal of International Law, 6(1), 81-99. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/237216667?accountid=285

Bibliographical Entry:

                This article attempts to sum up various aspects of relevant laws regarding the sovereignty, or property rights, or space, whether it be physical ownership rights or intellectual ones. Touching on important points such as past international treaties, ideas that the UN has brought up in the recent past and what they continue to focus on, the ambiguity present in most of these ideas and treaties, how ownership on earth transitions into  space and vice versa and why property rights are even important to the people / entities involved this article a solid basis of information and good elementary rationale about the topic of sovereignty in space. One of the major important points that I got out of the article is that business will be less inclined to get involved in the realm of space if their assets cannot be protected whilst in space, thus, the advancement into space is being hindered by incongruities in property right laws  in space. This article should be used as a resource to inform readers of the basic aspects of the space property debate and to inform them as to why the debate is important.

Source:

                Freeland, S. (2005). Up, up and . . . back: The emergence of space tourism and its impact on the international law of outer space. Chicago Journal of International Law, 6(1), 1-22. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/237208027?accountid=285

Bibliographical Entry:

                My use of this article stems at the fact that it can help me to show how available space travel can be to the average human in the near future if we can allow businesses to work the magic of efficiency that seems to go along with competition. The article also touches on some major inconsistencies in various national laws and international laws throughout the world as well as the vague nature of most laws. Space tourism, putting an average "Joe" into orbit, also isn't anywhere in space law, and that's most likely going to be one of the more important topics once space becomes more economically assessable. The article also mentions actual land rights in space. Yes, I realize this is somewhat farfetched, but it may be a good starting paragraph to get a hold of the audience's attention, I mean, everyone loves a little science fiction. Overall, this article may provide some information to make a solid intro paragraph as well as provide data on Space Tourism, a relatively new idea on the space frontier.

Source:

                Freeland, S. (2010). Fly me to the moon: How will international law cope with commercial space tourism? Melbourne Journal of International Law, 11(1), 90-118. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/745603338?accountid=285

Bibliographical Entry: 

                     This article is extremely legalistic in its outlook. I was thinking this may provide some of the backbone to some of the legal information needed to create concrete and realistic scenarios with which I can analyze and infer outcomes and how each scenario may affect the lives of individual humans once the capacity for economical space travel is achieved. The article mentions the five major factors that are referenced when dealing with sovereignty in space and legalistically looks at what each says and why each is important. The five main treaties are: 1. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 2. Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 3. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, 4.Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, and 5. the Moon Agreement. Purpose of this article: legal rationale and analysis of the current "Space Tourism / Sovereignty in Space" that can be easily used to create plausible outcomes that can then be analyzed.

Article Summary #1

Article Citation:

                Panel weighs price of space launch range privatization. (2000). Defense Daily, 207(63), 1-1. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/234070804?accountid=285

Accessed: 1/9/12

Summary:

                Kerry Gildea, in her article regarding the privatization of US space/shuttle launch sites, depicts multiple arguments for and against the privatization and grazes over some of the possible implications of each argument. A group of people, called the Defense Science Board (DSB), have recently put together a plan to interweave both governmental and non-federal ownership involvement in the management and use of three major launches ranges in the US. Under the plan, the government would be responsible for "the range infrastructure and [in] carry[ing] out its fundamental responsibilities for public safety, ballistic missile testing and flight worthiness of civil and national security payloads" and the private sector would overlook "the operations of the future launch pads and launch and satellite vehicle processing and much of the range support functions through a joint Air Force/NASA base operations and support contract." However, the DSB hinted that no matter what happened there would still be a  fairly prevalent level of government involvement within the infrastructure of these launch facilities. The reason for the creation of this plan is that in the recent past, commercial launching has exceeded its previous quota, which has placed a strain on the Air Forces ability to use these facilities as well as maintain its infrastructure. The main argument against more control being given to the private sector is that it will give an unfair advantage to those with the most money, as they will be the only ones with means to achieve space travel because of its extremely expensive nature. However, industries argue almost the exact opposite. Their argument is that if space travel were to be commercialized, both competition and the drive to be as profitable  as possible would lead to reusable spacecrafts. Also, competition and profit desire would allow almost anyone in the United States access to space, as costs to travel  would be low enough to enable this. In the past, the cost of space was so high because the government wasn't using reusable ships and thus had to rebuild them every so often, which is incredibly expensive. But, if businesses were put in charge,  they would find a means to create much more durable space crafts, reducing the cost of space remarkably, allowing a much much greater percentage of the population access to space.