On-orbit transfer of satellites between states: legal issues with special emphasis on liability and registration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Space has become highly commercialized and satellites are treated as transferable goods, even while they are on orbit. Although the existing international space law regime allows such transfers, it also raises some serious questions especially with regards to registration and liability. The insufficiency of the present legal framework is rooted in the cause that the space treaties were drafted decades ago, and it was not possible to contemplate on-orbit transfers at that time. Under present regime of space law, in case of an inter-State on-orbit transfer of satellite, there may be a State having de jure jurisdiction and control over a space object, for which it is liable, while another State has de facto control over the space object and is responsible, as it is that State's national activity. In this context, finding a pragmatic solution, while keeping in mind the interests of the victims, the transferor and the transferee, is imperative. Consequently, it is important to analyze whether the current framework of law is competent to deal with the issue, or whether the existing law needs to be amended. Because on-orbit transfers are happening now and will increase in the future, the topic is an extremely significant one and addresses a practical problem.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".