I was reading The Case for Mars by Robert Zubrin and, beyond debating his idea in general (on a low-cost, very-soon colonization of Mars), it had me thinking.
Lets say that NASA (and all other space agencies) fails to make plans for Mars. In 50 years time if the technology was available, and there were corporate interests, a privately owned colonization could occur. Up until this point let us imagine that no one was on Mars.
Would the party involved have rights to own the whole thing? Who could dispute it? It might not have to necessarily be a corporation, but rather an extremely rich person/dynasty could amass the tools, ships, whatever to make it happen through their own privately-owned space agency (far off future).
If they touched down and erected defenses all around the planet--do they have a legitimate "ownership" of the whole thing? (and launched the existing rovers on the surface back into space )
I'm thinking about the far-off future when a privately-owned adventure could try and harvest the resources of Mars without concern for future human-led colonization and permanent living scenarios.
Do they have "property rights" in a legitimate sense?
Lets say that NASA (and all other space agencies) fails to make plans for Mars. In 50 years time if the technology was available, and there were corporate interests, a privately owned colonization could occur. Up until this point let us imagine that no one was on Mars.
Would the party involved have rights to own the whole thing? Who could dispute it? It might not have to necessarily be a corporation, but rather an extremely rich person/dynasty could amass the tools, ships, whatever to make it happen through their own privately-owned space agency (far off future).
If they touched down and erected defenses all around the planet--do they have a legitimate "ownership" of the whole thing? (and launched the existing rovers on the surface back into space )
I'm thinking about the far-off future when a privately-owned adventure could try and harvest the resources of Mars without concern for future human-led colonization and permanent living scenarios.
Do they have "property rights" in a legitimate sense?