In article ,
Stephen Souter wrote:

In article ,
Joe Strout wrote:

In article ,
Stephen Souter wrote:

As for the time prior to that...that would probably have been the Treaty
of Tordesilla, in which Spain and Portugual carved up the world outside
Europe between themselves.

No, I don't see that as at all comparable. This would be something more
like the Land Grant system used to settle the west (except that in this
case, there are no aboriginal people to complicate the issue).

How is the US land grant system "comparable"? The land that was granted
was part of territory the US had already claimed as its own.

Right.

If the US (or UN or any other group of nations) make no claim of
sovereignty to (say) the Moon or Mars yet nevertheless claim to be able
to regulate land title there

"If" condition untrue, therefore "then" clause irrelevant.

Yes, the body providing legal status to (say) lunar land claims would
have to itself have sovereignty over that area. Ideally this would be
the UN or some large group of nations that have worked out a
shared-sovereignty agreement. But honestly, I'd be satisfied if it were
just the U.S., since the U.S. (for better or worse) is a strong enough
superpower for its claims to have force even if disputed by other
countries. Not absolute force, of course, but probably enough to cause
some investors to risk it.

In the case of the Treaty of Tordesilla, Spain and Portugual did make
claims of sovereignty, but even then they proved unenforceable when
other nations like France and England simply thumbed their noses at the
treaty.

Right. And such could happen again, in theory, and this would factor
into investors' risk estimates. But it's much less likely now than it
was then, especially if the property rights granted are dependent on
some sort of improvement (e.g., a working base capable of surveying the
claimed territory).

The latter were not a party to it, so they doubtless felt
themselves under no obligation to abide by it. To enforce their rights
under the treaty the Spanish & the Portuguese would therefore have had
to resort not merely to some individual before the courts (like the one
you postulate below) but force of arms.

Yes, but in addition, they had made ridiculous claims of ownership to
parts of the world its citizens had never seen. That's very different
from saying: you go settle the land, we'll back up your claim, which is
essentially what the Commission seems to be suggesting here.

If the Spanish & Portuguese had said that, and then some English
colonists had gone and killed a Spanish settlement and taken the land,
well then that would indeed have been a cause for war.

Now I come along, and for some perverted reason I claim some of the same
land, and start selling some of the same pieces. You can then take me
to court, demonstrate that my claims are invalid, and have my butt
thrown in jail for fraud.

Your scenario assumes that the world is populated only by Americans. Or
at least that both victim and perpetrator will be Americans.

No, only that the victim and perpetrator are both subject to the treaty
recognizing property rights. At present that would really only need to
involve the U.S. and Russia, though getting China on board would
certainly be a good idea.

But suppose Canada didn't sign the treaty, and I'm Canadian. OK, then,
perhaps you can't sue me for selling land claims that overlap yours.
But whose do you think will be worth more -- yours, backed by a treaty
including the U.S., Russia, and others, or mine, backed by the lack of
any clear extraterrestrial property rights law in Canada?

As difficult as it may be to believe but the writ of US law only runs on
US soil. Other places have their own laws, their own courts, and their
own governments. If such places are not part of the "majority of
relevant nations", why should they give too hoots about a piece of paper
whose ability to be enforced stops at the borders of those other nations?

They should not. And investors will not give too hoots about the
conflicting land claims of the citizens of such nations, either.

You keep picturing it like some sort of tussle of force, but that's not
the world we live in. It's about economics and investor confidence.
Claims backed by the U.S. government inspire far more investor
confidence, and will generate more economic activity, than claims backed
by, say, Argentina. (Meaning no disrespect to Argentinians; it's simply
a matter of relative economic size and power.)

Let's do it this way. Let the U.S. government (and ideally, other
nations joined in a treaty) provide for its some way for its citizens to
own land in a way recognized by those nations. If you don't have faith
that such claims are worthwhile, then don't buy any. Your arguments and
mine are both irrelevant; in the end the market will decide.

But it's certainly not going to get any better by not trying.

That is all the legal enforcement that is necessary. It will be a
*long* time before anything is done off Earth without there being
someone on Earth who can be held accountable for it.

And just exactly who would you "hold accountable" on Earth if the land
in question lay on (say) Mars and the rival claimant was living on Mars?
Someone who has gone up to live there on a permanent basis may not have
any assets left in Earth to "arrest".

Please take note of word in asterisks in above quote.

So there really is nothing needed here but a clear legal status for
property rights, which can be agreed upon by a majority of relevant
nations.

This is, of course, assuming that it is the US which is on the side of
the "majority of relevant nations".

No, actually nothing in my statement implies that. But in reality, of
course it will be. The only relevant nations now are the U.S. and
Russia, and perhaps China -- and it's very unlikely that Russia and
China are going to run off and make a treaty that leaves the U.S. out.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'