Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: Now, wait a minute. Now wait a minute.
[00:00:02] Speaker B: Today we're here in the people's voting booth. The votes are real. The elections are legal. Your vote does matter. It's time to vote.
It's time to vote. It's the most important election of our lives.
This election, which will be, I do truly believe, the most important election of our lifetime.
[00:00:23] Speaker A: This is the most important election of our lifetime.
[00:00:27] Speaker B: This is the most important election. Don't you you hear?
[00:00:31] Speaker C: This is the most important election in our lifetime.
[00:00:35] Speaker B: I certainly think it's the most important election of my lifetime.
[00:00:38] Speaker C: This is the most important election of our times.
Politicians say every time, this is the most important election. This one's really that important.
[00:00:47] Speaker B: Vote. We're back. Back. We had real elections in real life recently.
By the time this show comes out, you'll be like, that wasn't recent, but I don't care.
[00:00:56] Speaker A: It's recent in our hearts.
[00:00:57] Speaker B: Yeah. Or maybe we'll actually, you know what, people, there's still people that think like 2016 is recent. So maybe, maybe, I don'.
[00:01:04] Speaker A: Know, I don't know.
[00:01:05] Speaker B: We are here today for some very, very special voting. We are being joined by a guest that I'm personally very excited about, a guest that you may know as being banned from blue sky. A guy that we like to call Link, the space law expert. Thank you for coming to the show, Link. Welcome.
[00:01:26] Speaker C: Thank you so much. And you know, if you think about it, every election is the most important election of your life because you can die anytime.
[00:01:36] Speaker A: That's makes you think.
[00:01:38] Speaker B: Yeah, it's so true.
As always. I'm Kennedy Cooper. We've got Andrew Fields with us as well. Andrew, say hi.
[00:01:46] Speaker A: Hello. Fun statistics, fact, numbers aren't real. They're a government conspiracy. So they. We can have rich people. Without numbers, we wouldn't have rich people.
[00:01:55] Speaker B: I There might be something to that Link. What do you think? You pro or against numbers?
[00:02:01] Speaker C: I mean, without numbers, we won't have rich people. But if you think about it, without letters, poverty wouldn't exist because you couldn't spell poverty. So really makes you think.
[00:02:11] Speaker A: Really makes you think.
[00:02:13] Speaker B: Link, thank you so much for agreeing to do the show today because there are. I hate to say this, I really shames me to say this. There are people that don't listen all the way through podcasts. I like to let people know, like, what's cool about them and where to find them and stuff like that up front a little bit. So where do people you. I know it's not blue sky.
[00:02:34] Speaker C: Yes. I am currently banned Permanently from Blue Sky. But you can find me on Twitter. I unlocked my Twitter account because I can't post other places.
And yeah, I have an Instagram, but that's kind of private. So if you add me and I don't know who you are, I probably won't let you follow me. But, yeah, Instagram or Twitter. And you can also Google me on the Interwebs. And there are a bunch of sites that come up if you're looking for not fun places to find me.
[00:03:05] Speaker B: Yeah, this. This, this man is a real space law expert. Like, we're not joking. This is not like a bit. I know we do a lot of bits on this show, so it might have been a little unclear.
[00:03:15] Speaker A: Yeah, no, I've been excited when I saw that we got you link and, I mean, we'll see what the topic is today. But, like, I think you can guess at this point what we're talking about.
[00:03:26] Speaker B: I just think it's fun that in my lifetime we're living in a time where we have space law experts.
[00:03:34] Speaker C: Yeah, I mean, there are space law experts that have been around since they invented space law in, like, the 50s and 60s, but now I think it's a little bit more mainstream and still not super mainstream because I still get what the fuck is space law all the time. But, yeah, there is more than one space law expert, and a lot of them are actually on the Internet. Like, I know, again, I'm not on there, but there are space law experts on Blue sky who are not me right now that people can and go out and search and find and interact with.
[00:04:03] Speaker B: Yeah. Are y' all all in, like, a group chat? You got, like, the secret space LOD DM group. That's fire as hell if there was one.
[00:04:12] Speaker C: I'm not part of it. Maybe I'm not cool enough for that. But there are definitely some space chats. I know that there are a few space groups. They're not all space law and policy folks. Some of them are engineers or launch experts or whatever. But the space community is really big, really diverse.
There are lots of cool people in the space.
Are lots of assholes in the space community. Obviously there are really famous who are part of the space community. But yeah, it's cool. I like it. I think space is really fascinating and interesting for so many different reasons. So I feel like I'm really lucky that I get to say that I'm a space person.
[00:04:48] Speaker B: Yeah, honestly, that's cool as shit. And for the listeners at home, it might be wondering, like, what, what, what does it mean to be a space law expert? Like, could you give just a little more of the, like, backstory into. I've also got some notes here and don't mind filling in a bit as well about some of the treaties that have been signed and things like that. But. But you'll. You'll probably have a much more eloquent way of putting it than I would like. Just what. Where does it all start? Where is it all going? How do you fit into it?
[00:05:22] Speaker C: Yeah. So I don't know if I'll be more eloquent. I'll say that I am a space law expert or space law and policy expert, because I am technically not space lawyer. Most people who go to school and get a space law degree, like, I have actually practiced law, but I don't. So I'm not an attorney. So I'm not technically a space lawyer. I know some people argue about it, but space law as a practice area or area of focus has existed, like I said, from the 50s and 60s since before the very first satellite launch, which was Sputnik by the Soviets. And there are space law treaties. There are international space law treaties. In the US we have a ton of national space law and regulations. A lot of federal agencies are involved in space. So a lot of people think immediately about NASA, but there's also the fcc, which is the Federal Communications Commission, the faa, which is the Federal Aviation Administration.
There are so many different things, so many people involved.
If you think at the international level, it's not just the United nations and the Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. There's also the itu, which is the International Telecommunications Union, which allocates spectrum. There's so much. There's so much space law, which is so cool and so interesting. And that's why we need more people, because there are so many areas where we need more people to be experts. Because I can't be an expert about everything. And I tell my students when I teach space, so, like, I only know a little, little tiny piece of this. And so I have to bring in other people who can teach you because I can't teach you everything because there's so much. And there's. There's so much that we need help with so that people don't take advantage of the system, which is kind of what happens right now.
[00:07:06] Speaker B: Yeah, I have to say I was amazed just to learn a little bit about how much there is, like you say, dating back to the 50s and 60s. I mean, in the first kind of major, as I understand it, space law Resolution that comes in 1963 from the UN and technically it was a resolution from 1962, but you know how that stuff works. Takes time to actually be gratified. But, like, that's. I think that goes back further than a lot of people would imagine. In some ways, it's one of those.
[00:07:39] Speaker A: Things I never really thought about it, but if you take the five seconds to think about how the US Was the first one to put our flag on the moon, yet we haven't claimed it, that there had to been ton of law already established at that point.
[00:07:55] Speaker C: Yeah, I think. I don't know about a ton of law at that point when the US Went to the moon. But I do think that oftentimes, for whatever reason, there are a bunch of different reasons. People just don't really conceptualize that there are rules and laws and restrictions and regulations about how people can operate in space. And you hear that a lot when people are like, space is lawless, or, you know, you can do whatever you want. There was actually, for those who don't know, we were talking earlier about Al Gore and Porter in 2000s, but there was a Bush administration official. I forgot which one of the evil people of the second Bush administration w.
But they were like, we want Guantanamo Bay to be like, outer space. No law. And this is in a memo. But it's. You can find this memo somewhere. And when I read that, I was like, but there is law in outer space. What are you talking about? You can't justify torture by being incorrect, which is not true, because law is fake. All law isn't real. You can do whatever you want if you have enough power. But anyway, yeah, even government officials in the office of the President, United States don't know that space law exists. And they use it to justify torture and black sites. But yeah, space law is real.
So space is not a completely lawless realm. There are lots of things you have to do to get into space. Sometimes people break the law and there are no repercussions, which, you know, happens all the time. But yeah, space law exists. It's a thing. There's lots of different space law. And depending on where you are in the world, you're regulated by different space laws based on your country.
[00:09:29] Speaker B: Is there. Are there any, like, particularly famous cases of space law being broken that are, like, interesting to you that we probably wouldn't know about because, like, we're not studied in this?
[00:09:40] Speaker C: There are a few. I think one of them is the Cosmos954 incident, which was a Soviet satellite crashing into Canada.
And oh my, there's actually space law, there's treaty law that says a country is responsible for their space objects and if they cause damage on Earth, they are liable for that. And so the Canadian government, I think, asked for six or seven, six to $8 million. I don't know which one, which one is. And then the Soviets only ended up paying like 3 or 4.
But that's a pretty famous case because it shows the responsibility and liability aspects of it. So that is the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability convention. There's also.
It's not really a case because nothing happened, but there's an incident where someone put tardigrades, which are little tiny microscopic bears, basically on a rocket and blast it to the moon. And you're not supposed to do that because there's this thing called do regard and forward and backwards contamination where you are not supposed to introduce potential biological harms to another celestial body. But this person was, you know, an asshole, a rich asshole who could afford it.
So they shot it up and did that. And then something that happened recently, it wasn't a case, but another rich person tried to have their ashes put on the moon, which a lot of people have done.
But NASA didn't consult the Navajo Nation and other First Nations. And there is a memorandum of understanding between NASA and First nations folks that if they are going to put remains or whatever on the moon, which is kind of a desecration to some of these cultures, that they will consult them and they didn't consult them. And so there was this huge issue. A bunch of people didn't understand it, but then the rocket failed and didn't make it to the moon, so it didn't count.
But yeah, there's, there's things happening in space all the time. There's all types of interesting interpretations or even violations of the law that are happening. And again, it kind of depends on which country you're in, depending on which law that you do or do not violate or have to follow.
[00:11:48] Speaker B: Yeah, and it seems like, I mean, in a lot of ways this is something that's just only continuing to get more prevalent and relevant and probably will continue on that path unless society like radically collapses.
There is something to that human desire to explore space. And I, I, I feel it. Like I don't even understand it necessarily. But like, I, I definitely vibe with the exploration of space. I want it to be done responsibly. And I have feelings about that too. But, you know, I get it on a lot of levels, like why there's so Much drive towards this. But it is like, it is something that because there is so much human drive to do this, it's going to continue to have increasing consequences. I mean we just saw, was it last week that the, you know, the Shangon, some of the Shangon crews return was delayed by a space debris incident. And you know, like, we're starting to see like the implications of that stuff more and more. And it's just like the more that we, the more that we go to space, the more that we're going to have to grapple with having these kinds of complex interactions. Right?
[00:12:56] Speaker C: Yeah. Space debris is such a huge issue and for again, a lot of folks, it's not something that's immediate and day to day, so it doesn't, it's not a huge concern for them. But when you think about mega constellations that are having thousands of thousands of satellites going up into orbit, that creates a really, really difficult environment for things to be sustainable. And once you have space debris, once satell hitting each other, it can cause so many different types of problems. Not only delays of returns, but it could affect launches as things try to get through all the debris to get out of orbit, things crashing back down into Earth. You think about the ISS being decommissioned and that coming back down to Earth allegedly going to be crashed into the Pacific Ocean because I guess the Pacific Ocean is a big trash can for her international space stations and that's okay. That has environmental concerns and impacts.
Yeah, I think for a long time people in the space industry didn't have a microscope on them as they were doing all this activity and putting all this shit up there. And we're reaching a point now where it's becoming a real issue and it's impacting more than just like countries trying to get to the moon, you know.
[00:14:18] Speaker B: Yeah, it's definitely. These things are going to become pretty big issues in the coming future. And like when you also see stuff like Jeff Bezos coming out in the news and saying let's put a data center in space and it's like, what does this all really mean?
[00:14:35] Speaker A: Listen, I trust this Elon Musk guy to get us to Mars in five years. He can be the first one on the rocket. He can take all the billionaires on the rocket. They'll make the trip just fine.
[00:14:47] Speaker C: Yeah, I doubt that.
[00:14:50] Speaker A: That'S the secret plan.
Trust the plan.
[00:14:54] Speaker B: Well, I think we've, we've come up with, I think perhaps an interesting way to help introduce voters at home who may not know that much about space law into a Little bit of a greater understanding of it through the lens of discussing something that people understand much better, which is sci fi television. You dabble in a bit of the old sci fi link, do you not?
[00:15:21] Speaker C: Yeah, so when I teach class, I think it's in two weeks. I don't know when this episode's going out, but two weeks from whenever this is recording, we actually have a class where we go through space media and try to dissect what space law is being followed or broken and things like that. So interstellar, Star Wars, Star Trek, all those different types of movies. No one in my class has done Spaceballs yet, which is interesting, but maybe they will, or Starship Troopers. But yeah, there's. There's so much out there.
[00:15:53] Speaker B: Well, and I think like speculative fiction is an interesting way to look towards the future sometimes and that it's not, you know, it's, it's silly in some ways, but it's also a very real way to look at possibility sometimes. And in a lot of ways, like the limits of politics are the limits of imagination. And when you're talking about something like space law, you have to be a little imaginative, right? Because like you're, you're treading into territory that's so mysterious compared to a lot of other things that are a lot more established.
[00:16:30] Speaker A: Like to think about that one joke on Twitter where leftist argue Marx is in today's world and they argue what Marx would say and oh, Marx, you would believe that this is wrong. And Marx is like, wait, you went to the moon? Marx, what's your opinion on this? You mean the moon in the fucking sky?
[00:16:51] Speaker C: Yeah, the big piece of cheese in the sky.
[00:16:56] Speaker B: We sent stuff there more than once. It's happened.
[00:17:00] Speaker A: We put our flag there because America.
[00:17:04] Speaker B: But yeah, link. Do you have any feelings on the link. The connection between speculative fiction.
[00:17:11] Speaker A: You said it, you said it, Kennedy said it.
[00:17:15] Speaker B: And, and the ability to be like imaginative in like sort of relative groundbreaking, so to speak, cutting, you know, cutting edge political situations, if you will.
[00:17:26] Speaker C: I think a lot of times you'll see a hope and an optimism in a lot of sci fi and speculative fiction. That's not always the case, but overwhelmingly it's dreaming of a better world and a better future for humanity. And I think we should take more of that inspiration rather than the technological inspirations and the exploration inspiration.
I think what the space industry is missing a lot and something I tried to bring to it is this idea that space is an opportunity for humanity to learn new things about ourselves and to improve ourselves. I think we can also view space as a really terrible opportunity for the worst of humanity to replicate itself on an even bigger scale. Because space is so huge and so massive that we can see all types of awful, terrible shit become even worse. But for me, it's getting harder. But for me, space is still an opportunity where it's like there's so much we don't know about space and surviving on our own that it requires us to be more communal and be more human towards one another. And maybe that makes us better people here on Earth. I don't think that's gonna happen. I'm losing that hope ever so slightly. But I do think science fiction is a way where we can find that hope and build on those dreams.
[00:18:59] Speaker B: Yeah, well, I mean, that hope, the way I always try to look at it is like that hope is as real or as not real as it exists in the minds of X number of people, so to speak, right? Like it's just a matter of like, if enough people had that same hope that you have, then it would be real. So, you know, I think, I don't know, maybe that can give folks out there some, some little glimmer of, of a, of a brighter future is, you know, actually listen to, listen to link and learn about space law. And maybe there is a hope for a better future in space. Rather than billionaires forcing people into space warehouses for 700 hour shifts or whatever.
[00:19:43] Speaker A: Space data center. Space data center.
Data center on space.
[00:19:48] Speaker B: Let's put a data center in space. Let's do it.
[00:19:51] Speaker C: Dark, dark times. Dark times.
[00:19:55] Speaker B: Let's do it.
[00:19:55] Speaker C: What could go wrong?
[00:19:57] Speaker B: Name one thing.
Name one science fiction franchise that's ever predicted anything going wrong with something like this.
[00:20:05] Speaker A: I can't think of one.
[00:20:08] Speaker B: Yeah, you have to name just one. That's the problem. That's the catch. Link, what do you, when it comes to your favorite hopeful science fiction worlds, what do you turn to which stories give you hope for the future?
[00:20:23] Speaker C: Wow, that is really hard.
Only because I'm so jaded right now.
But I think you can find hope even in media depictions that are not overwhelmingly positive or even too aspiring.
So I think about the expanse a lot and how it's so clear and showing human bigotries and nativism and jingoism and all that stuff in terms of how people from Earth view people from Mars view people from the Belt. But something I think that gets lost in there, especially the show, is how eventually the United, the world is governed by the United Nations. So it's really like the world becomes a Singular country, almost. Not like weirdo conspiracy theorists, one world order or whatever. But I think the idea that we are all people of Earth and that is a shared commonality is something that today we collectively, we don't really have the vision for because we're so caught in our individual countries and our individual continents and there's all this economic warfare and literal warfare of people who are living basically in the same place. And so I think that's really interesting and how even when it's using the commonality of being born on Earth as a way to perpetuate bigotry against people who are not from Earth, there's still that collective bond. And, you know, I wonder what a future would look like where it's, you know, we're all from Earth, so we're. We're a collective in that rather than hating each other.
[00:22:19] Speaker B: That's great. I like that. Yeah, I really agree with that kind of thinking. Let's step into the voting booth.
But actually, it's not really a voting booth.
[00:22:31] Speaker A: No, not really a voting booth. We lied to you, voters at home.
[00:22:34] Speaker B: And Link, I think you'll like this because based on the class you've described, what we've prepared for you today is something that you're pretty prepared for, I think.
[00:22:45] Speaker A: So what are we doing today, Kennedy?
[00:22:47] Speaker B: Today we are stepping into.
The courtroom of Space Judge Link. All the space cases are real and all the space verdicts are final.
Link, are you ready to pass judgment? Judge Link, are you ready, your honor?
[00:23:12] Speaker C: Oh, wow.
All cops are bastards. Including space judges.
[00:23:21] Speaker A: You're an exception. You're an exception. We make a special exception for you.
[00:23:25] Speaker C: I'm ready.
[00:23:26] Speaker B: We've prepared some cases. We'll be representing different sides of these cases. And Link, it's going to be up to you to make a final judgment in each case, whether it be on.
[00:23:36] Speaker A: Actual space lar or failing that vibes, your word is final.
[00:23:41] Speaker C: I will try not to be too drunk on power.
[00:23:45] Speaker B: First off, are you familiar with Space Channel 5, the music video game 1999?
[00:23:50] Speaker C: I am not so.
[00:23:52] Speaker A: Well, I'm the one who introduced this one, so I'll talk. So all you need to know is In Space Channel 5 Part 2, we are introduced to Space President Peace, who is basically Space Teddy Roosevelt and Space President Peace is the President of the galaxy. That's really all you have to know, aside from the points that we'll bring up when we bring up the. The case In Space Channel 5, there is a Space President of the Galaxy.
[00:24:22] Speaker C: Noted.
[00:24:23] Speaker B: All right, so the first case is should there be a Space President, or should there be no ultimate authority of the galaxy? We're starting off with a whammy.
[00:24:35] Speaker C: I would rule that there should not be a Space President.
[00:24:39] Speaker A: We have to keep our case first.
[00:24:41] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, hear us out first.
[00:24:44] Speaker C: Okay, well, that'll be futile, but I'm happy to listen.
[00:24:47] Speaker A: Okay.
[00:24:49] Speaker B: All right. The cold facts of the case are that President Peace was kidnapped for ransom.
That is a cold fact.
[00:24:57] Speaker A: In this case, somebody else could try to take over. All right, I will be. I am the defense for Space President Peace.
I have two claims for you, your honor. One, Space President Peace is beloved and encourages everybody in space to be their best.
Space President Peace also has a beautiful singing voice that inspires all who have are under him and is thus ultimately Space President Peace is this figure that helps unite us, as you were maybe saying earlier, who helps unite us as one people in the galaxy.
[00:25:34] Speaker B: Your honor, if I may bring my portion of the case.
Bear, I could find no proof whatsoever that President Peace was elected by anyone in any process.
I rest my case.
Judge Link, your final decision.
[00:25:53] Speaker A: I got a chance. I've got a chance.
[00:25:57] Speaker C: Yeah. So this is. This was actually super funny because one of the things that I work on in the real world or for real life is what it looks like for people who are eventually born or living in space long term to have self determination and political agency. And so part of that is you can't have a President of the galaxy unless every.
Every celestial bodies, every planet, every group of people, whatever, decided that that's collectively what they wanted, which is possible. But as we just talked about, we can't even do that on Earth. We can't even have a President of Earth. So I would say that, yeah, there's definitely no room in my courtroom for a President of the galaxy. Also, the galaxy is just massive. If you think about the scale of the galaxy. I know most people don't like to think of that. That is so massive. Like, how could you even responsibly govern all of that and do it in a timely manner? It's actually impossible. It's quite literally impossible to do that right now. Especially anarchy for the galaxy.
Yeah. So no President right now.
[00:27:12] Speaker B: All right. Heck yeah. That's one point for me so far. Yes, we're keeping score between me and.
[00:27:18] Speaker A: We didn't just.
[00:27:20] Speaker B: Okay, there's a prize.
It's a new blunder. All right, our next case.
Gru versus the United States. You have any familiarity with despicable me?
[00:27:34] Speaker C: Yes, unfortunately.
[00:27:39] Speaker B: So this, in this case, we're examining, is Gru allowed to steal the Moon, or is the USA allowed to kill him for trying? The cold facts of this case are no one owns the moon as established by UN treaty.
[00:27:53] Speaker A: Now, your Honor, I have two claims in defense of this innocent, super innocent man, Gru, who's never committed a crime in his life.
One, the US has no authority to defend something not truly owned by anybody. And I also believe that this would set a bad precedent for the US to do even more space attacks. Finding various excuses to do so.
[00:28:18] Speaker B: All right, your Honor, if I may. The moon has a shared cultural heritage value that must be protected at all costs.
I think that is without question. Also, I think something else that should be without question is that the Moon has a right to defend itself, full stop.
Your Honor, what is your ruling in this case?
[00:28:43] Speaker C: Wow, this is. This is a bit tougher. I would say that GRU does not have a right to steal the Moon because you cannot appropriate a celestial body based on treaty law, UN treaty law, real space law. I would also say that technically, under current UN Treaty law, you cannot have aggressive military action, but you could have defensive military action, because there's a gray area.
And based on actual history, sometimes the United States does a thing called preemptive defense, which is not a real thing.
Also, the Israeli government does that too. Obviously not a real thing.
But I would say if the United States government were to kill Gru defensively to preemptively prevent him from stealing the Moon, they would probably get away with it. Though in my courtroom, I would say that is super duper, not cool and wrong and illegal. So I would rule that Gru.
Cannot steal the Moon and the United States should not kill him for planning to seal the Moon.
[00:30:10] Speaker B: See, cannot and should not are not the same.
[00:30:14] Speaker C: They are not legally.
[00:30:16] Speaker A: I didn't go to. I did not go to a good space law school.
I went to trust space law. Was that not a good idea?
[00:30:27] Speaker C: I mean, that. That'll probably happen soon. I'm sure that will.
[00:30:31] Speaker B: For our next case, I've got to ask you, Link. What. What is your familiarity? And I'm up to two points, by the way. Two points.
What is your familiarity with Mobile Suit Gundam?
[00:30:43] Speaker C: Pretty strong familiarity, especially depending on which series we're talking about.
[00:30:50] Speaker B: Excellent. Excellent. Our next case brings forward Neo Zeon versus the International Astronomy Astronomical Union.
You may or may not remember this, but there is a plot point in the show revolving around the blocking of telescopes with Monovsky particles that a major. A major astronomical observation that was planned is blocked by a Unpack a unknown about military action being taken by Neo Zeon, considered to be a terrorist group at that time.
So with that in mind, are Minovsky particles protected political speech?
So the cold facts of this case are that Monovsky particles, as I mentioned, block and disrupt radio waves when large numbers of combat units are gathered in one place.
And these are shed by the reactors that mobile suits in particular have and all the spaceships that carry them around.
So this includes during non violent security actions and political demonstrations, as is often addressed in the show, like just gathering a bunch of mobile suits in one place will just block out a lot of communications. Another cold fact of the case is that modern astronomy is heavily reliant on radio telescopes. A lot of people don't realize this. They. I think it's a lot more exciting to think about the telescope that you look through with your eye. It's really cool to see stuff.
But a lot of the most interesting observations that we get from especially much further out in space come from radio telescopes.
So, you know, Monovsky particles clearly present an obstacle to the use of radio telescopes. So that's where the case stands in terms of cold facts. I am here to defend Neo Xeon. First of all, it is our second amendment right to own a mobile suit.
I'm going to stand by that one.
Second, if we don't hold individuals responsible for their car emissions, then aren't we setting a new dangerous precedent if we set a precedent around Minovsky particle emissions for mobile suit ownership?
[00:32:55] Speaker A: Your Honor, I simply have one claim to make in this case. They didn't do an environmental review.
[00:33:03] Speaker C: Yeah, I would agree with that. I think that you actually can regulate emissions. You do it at the industry level. And I think environmental review is incredibly important for long term sustainability.
I also believe in dark and quiet skies and people having access to the night sky as both a cultural resource, but also as a scientific resource so that we can do Earth observations and learn more about the universe around us. So I would say, yeah, that's not free speech. That is environmental pollution.
[00:33:39] Speaker A: Yeah, eat it. Abundance. Folks.
[00:33:42] Speaker B: I can't even argue against this one because you use the shared heritage of the night sky, which is an argument I used to win a case earlier.
Dang it. All right, well, I guess that means Andrew gets a point.
[00:33:55] Speaker A: I'm winning by negative one points.
[00:33:58] Speaker B: All right, for our next case, we're taking it to good old Cowboy Bebop. You a fan of that one?
[00:34:05] Speaker C: Yes, and I'm not a hater of the live action.
[00:34:08] Speaker B: Oh, I actually. Let's Discuss this for a minute. I think the live action was over. Hated. It's not great. Don't get me wrong. Like, people are going to be like, oh, well, you think it's a. You think it's a great show. You think it's a 10 out of 10. No, I absolutely don't. But it was vastly overhated, was it not?
[00:34:29] Speaker C: I would agree. I would say the show is probably a 6.5 or a 7. I think it was really okay. I think when you have animated stuff that is amazing, it's really hard to convert that to live action, which is why I hate 2010-2018. Disney. I guess they're still doing live action remakes, but I hate the idea of trying to make the emotions of cartoons and animation be live action.
I just. That's something I personally don't need in life. I enjoy it because it's animated.
[00:35:05] Speaker B: Yeah, There's a real subtle art to translating characters that are originally from an animated property where things are very exaggerated into a form where that's more like real life. And then trying not to fall into some kind of uncanny valley is pretty challenging, actually.
And I actually think in a lot of ways that Live Action Cowboy Bebop did okay in that regard. I think the two big slip ups were with Ed. I think the way they handled Ed was just kind of a miss for me. It wasn't like, horrifying. It was just like, nah.
And I also think the villain whose name is slipping my mind for some reason.
[00:35:54] Speaker A: I got my space law degree for this. What kind of court is this?
[00:36:00] Speaker C: Yeah, but I will put an asterisk on there. So like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Live Action is a great live action, but it's not a remake. You know, it's not like they did something different. I would also say, unfortunately, Michael Bay's Transformers is great live action Transformers content. Not to give Michael Bay too much credit, but I thought they did really well making Live action as Transformers. I'm sure there are other examples by.
[00:36:29] Speaker B: The standards of picking something that had previously been a comic or an animated thing and turning it into live action. We actually have to give Transformers some. Some. You have to hand it to Michael Bay slightly here.
[00:36:42] Speaker C: I don't think I will do that.
[00:36:44] Speaker A: This former.
They're just robots.
[00:36:47] Speaker B: But. But only ever so slightly because he also gave us Shia LaBeouf, which is a curse.
[00:36:54] Speaker C: No, that's not true. Even Steven's Disney Channel is the. The evil corporation that blesses everything that.
[00:37:01] Speaker B: Really, you know, that just. That checks out. I should have known it was a Disney thing.
[00:37:06] Speaker C: Classic.
[00:37:06] Speaker B: All right. So is the Gate Corporation responsible for the Gate incident?
That's what we're gonna examine today.
This is a case of the remaining people of Earth versus the Gate Public Corporation. To what extent does the Gate Corporation owe responsibility for the Astral gate incident of 2022 CE is the question at hand today in this case, your honor.
So it's a cold fact that the explosion of the Astral Gate incident shattered a massive portion of the moon, resulted in resulting in lunar debris moving outward. Much of the lunar debris started to fall then to Earth in the same frequency as a weather phenomenon. The resulting rock showers did devastate the planet's surface, killing billions of people.
The devastation also destroyed infrastructure and many important cultural artifacts and records were lost.
In the aftermath of the incident, the human race numbered only 1.5 billion people. Uh, that. Those are the. Those are the cold facts of the case. However, I'm here to defend the Gate Public Corporation today on the basis that the Gate Public Corporation provides a valuable public service and that this is really a transit authority problem.
[00:38:27] Speaker A: Your honor, I would like to make the claim that manslaughter is bad.
Oh, in addition, I would like to make. I would like to point out that a whistleblower warned the company that the Gate was. Was not ready and was fired.
Later, he became a very beloved senile.
[00:38:46] Speaker B: Space chess master, but untrustworthy witness.
[00:38:50] Speaker A: What do you have against chess, Kennedy?
[00:38:53] Speaker B: I. I actually do have stuff against chess.
[00:38:55] Speaker A: Yes, so do I. So you know.
Anyways. Your honor, what do you.
[00:39:01] Speaker B: Your honor. Your honor.
[00:39:02] Speaker C: Yeah, I think Article 6 and Article 7 of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and also the Liability Convention of 1972 says that not only is the Gate Corporation super responsible for that, but the country in which the Gate Corporation is registered and launches all the terrible stuff that it launches and puts on the moon is also liable to pay out lots and lots of money.
[00:39:37] Speaker B: I can't believe we're tied now.
Why did I start keeping score?
[00:39:43] Speaker A: Oh, no, we didn't plan on this, Kennedy.
[00:39:47] Speaker C: This is.
[00:39:48] Speaker A: Anyways.
[00:39:50] Speaker B: All right, well, speaking of blowing up and fixing the moon, we've got another case about destruction of the moon. This one has a little bit of a different twist to it. So it'll be interesting to see if you kind of fall on the like leaning on those same articles that you mentioned.
Or maybe this one will come out a little differently. This one is Dr. Robotnik versus the UN Security Council. Who is responsible for fixing the moon.
[00:40:18] Speaker A: Now, let me. Let Me give the cold facts in this case.
In the video game Sonic Adventure 2, Dr. Robotnik blew up part of the fucking moon. However, in games after that, we have seen the moon completely intact since then. Which means, of course, the only logical explanation is somebody has fixed it. Now, in defense of Dr. Robotnik, who has never done anything wrong in his life except have a terrible person be his voice actor, I have two claims. One, at the end of Sonic Adventure 2, Dr. Robotnik changed his ways at the end of the games and feels bad about being a villain.
In addition, I will claim it is nation's responsibility to fix up such an important thing to the public.
[00:41:05] Speaker B: All right. Claims are pretty simple here.
Dr. Robotnik has a bunch of robots he's currently misusing and can use them to fix the moon. And also, the moon should not be blackmail collateral.
[00:41:18] Speaker A: Oh yeah, yes, you're honored I forgot that fact. Dr. Robotnik was totally using the moon as blackmail collateral.
[00:41:25] Speaker B: I don't think. I don't think that you should be allowed to use the moon as blackmail collateral.
[00:41:32] Speaker A: What do you think, Judge?
[00:41:35] Speaker C: Yeah, I also, you shouldn't use the moon as blackmail collateral. But also you shouldn't. In order to do that, you would have to claim the moon, which you can't do, or at least claim to have control over it. I think the language of the treaty is actually appropriation by use is one of the things. You can do it more than just by use. But yeah, I would say using the moon as blackmail is appropriating the moon by use and you shouldn't do that. But I will also just take a pause and say that Sonic is actually another property. That the live action isn't that bad.
[00:42:16] Speaker A: Oh no. I like Knuckles better than the video game Knuckles. Like, I'm just gonna say, did you watch the show?
[00:42:23] Speaker C: They had. They did like a. I think a six or eight episode miniseries.
[00:42:27] Speaker A: Because we have such a rotating on which streaming services are available. I forget whenever I have the access, but I do want to watch the show.
[00:42:36] Speaker C: Yeah, I was unsure if I needed to watch the show between Sonic 2 and Sonic 3. But yeah, Sonic 3 was iffy with Keanu Reeves. I won't say it was awful, but it was iffy with Keanu as Shad.
Anyway, yeah, I would say Robotnik cannot use the moon as blackmail collateral and probably shouldn't damage or threaten to damage the moon.
[00:42:58] Speaker A: Who could have seen this coming?
[00:43:00] Speaker C: The technical capability to repair the moon, which seems impossible, but you know, whatever, we're not in real life. You should probably do that because that impacts the tides and how people live on Earth, so. Yeah, yeah.
[00:43:15] Speaker B: I just want to say for the record, Sonic is one of those weird cases where the live action movies are better than the video games, the comic books, or the animated shows.
[00:43:25] Speaker A: I'm not falling for that bait.
Depending on what we're talking about, you're either wrong or completely right.
[00:43:32] Speaker C: I wouldn't say it was bait. I actually have gone back and watched the animated Sonic cartoon from the 90s.
[00:43:40] Speaker A: That's not great.
[00:43:41] Speaker C: It's underwhelming.
[00:43:43] Speaker A: Yes.
All right.
[00:43:45] Speaker B: That's one way to put it. Okay, next up here, we've got another.
Also, I'm back to. It's three, two. I'm back on top, baby. We've got another destruction of the moon question.
We're really going to get to the bottom of if there's an ethical destruction of the moon scenario or not. All right, this case is the people of the Saiyan planet versus Piccolo. Cold facts of this case are that Piccolo did blow up the moon and does not deny it. Also, the Saiyans didn't try to invade Earth and kill everyone on it. And they also do not deny this. I will be defending Piccolo. I know that this is a bold claim, but Piccolo destroyed the moon in self defense.
The entire planet was in danger of being destroyed by an out of control monkey form Gohan. And destroying the moon was the only fast option to prevent massive damage and loss of life. Thank you, your Honor.
[00:44:48] Speaker A: I would just like to say, to make one claim, it is ableist to not let Saiyans turn into giant monkeys.
[00:44:58] Speaker C: While it may be ableist, I do want to recognize and honor that Piccolo is black and black lives matter. And also that historically, judicial systems have incarcerated and punished black people at disproportional rates, and I do not want to contribute to that.
So Piccolo is justified.
[00:45:21] Speaker A: I can't argue with that.
[00:45:23] Speaker B: Thank you, your Honor.
Piccolo vindicated.
Piccolo exonerated.
I was really hoping that maybe by the end of this episode, we would have finally justified destroying the moon at least once.
And also, Piccolo, just one of the greatest. One of the greatest characters. All right, we've got a couple more cases. It's going pretty well for me.
[00:45:49] Speaker A: I'm winning my negative two points. I'm winning by negative two points.
[00:45:54] Speaker B: So, our next case.
I'm sure you've probably seen a bit of Futurama in your time, right?
[00:46:00] Speaker C: Yes, I have.
[00:46:01] Speaker B: I didn't even have to ask about Dragon Ball Z because I followed you on socials for a while, but.
And I guess I'll follow you on Twitter. I don't check it that much, but I will. I'll make. You know, I'll do the solid. Just hate every time I log in there. It feels like it's like going into like a 16 year old's room. Smells bad. So for Futurama, we've got various peoples of the known universe versus Planet Express.
This is a class action lawsuit.
[00:46:31] Speaker A: What crimes have they done? What crimes?
[00:46:36] Speaker B: This is a class action lawsuit against their general incompetence at delivering things on time. And also just damages done during deliveries.
Okay, so here are the cold facts of the case.
Philip J. Fry once drank a planet's Monarch.
[00:46:53] Speaker A: That's not delivery related.
[00:46:56] Speaker B: Bender once crashed the ship hauling dark matter, almost causing a major, major loss of life. And the packages are always late.
[00:47:06] Speaker A: Your Honor. Your honor, I have two claims for you. My first claim is everybody is using the wrong calendar. Not the same one that they use at Planet Express. The packages are on time according to their internal schedule. And two, if you would read the fine space print, all users of space of Planet Express forego their space protections.
[00:47:27] Speaker B: Your honor, my case against the Planet Express is simple. And it's that delivery services shouldn't have a body count. I rest my case. Thank you, your honor. What is your ruling?
[00:47:38] Speaker C: Wow. It's unfortunate that even as we live on multiple celestial bodies that we still have to participate in such a destructive system of capitalism. I want to show solidarity with the workers of Planet Express and understand that they have extreme forces working against them.
I think that this would be better handled in arbitration. I think that it's difficult to make a decision that does not promote capitalist hell and forcing workers in substandard working conditions to have to fight for their lives in court. So I will dismiss the class action against them.
[00:48:26] Speaker B: Are you really trying to kick this down to a lower court?
Is this one a tie or.
[00:48:32] Speaker A: Yeah, that one's. This is a tie.
[00:48:34] Speaker B: Is this one actually a tie? Okay.
[00:48:38] Speaker A: All right, so we've got two more cases for you.
[00:48:42] Speaker B: All right, two more cases.
This next case.
Maybe you've heard of a little kind of obscure series of films called Stars War.
The Stars War. The Stars War, I think, is the.
[00:48:59] Speaker C: The War of the Stars.
[00:49:01] Speaker B: Yeah. Oh, sorry, that's it. So in. In. In Warstar Galactica, you have, you know, the Empire is the ultimate authority.
And we are seeing a case today against.
With the Empire against the Jawa Salvage Guilds. Now this is a case over the rights to droids that fall from space.
The cold facts of this Case are that the Jawas do not deny that they salvage droids that fall from space, but consider it their right. I will be here to defend the Jawas today.
The Jawas activities have environmental benefits. Many droids contain toxins that can leach into the environment if not properly contained. I also argue that Tatooine is an unincorporated space territory and therefore salvage that falls onto this planet really has no clear jurisdiction.
[00:50:00] Speaker A: You're Holoner.
I would like to say, as we all know, most of the Death Stars operated by non political innocence. And they should not be punished for their mistakes as parts fall from the deaths from space.
I would also just like to say the Imperial Empire bought them legally.
[00:50:19] Speaker C: Man, I don't think buying things legally protects you from litter and pollution and being terrible. I actually think that that is a perpetuation of the vials of capitalism. So I would say Death Star super duper liable or the Empire, whichever. Both at the same time.
[00:50:40] Speaker A: Harsh but fair.
[00:50:41] Speaker B: Another win for me. We're at five, two. I don't think you can come back from this. Although I did did come up with a possible bonus case.
[00:50:52] Speaker A: I think our judge is running low on time.
[00:50:56] Speaker B: Oh, okay. So for our final case, the UN wants to add Prime Directive to its treaties and principles.
The Prime Directive demands a policy of non interference with any society without the ability of interstellar travel.
Those are the cold facts of the case. I am the defendant.
First of all, I just want to say for the record defending the Federation and the Prime Directive, that you cannot call the Federation colonizers because we wrote down on a little piece of paper, we will never colonize anything. Also, I would say that the Prime Directive, you know, it maintains biological imperatives as we've discussed previously, is important.
[00:51:41] Speaker A: I would just like to make one simple claim.
Got hungry people on these planets. They're starving, they're suffering. They could just use some medicine. We got replicated just the fucking feed the hungry people. Like come on, look. Look at Kennedy with that suit. Like doesn't think that they're developed enough to be fed.
[00:52:01] Speaker B: Like, ah.
[00:52:01] Speaker A: Do you think Judge, just because you.
[00:52:04] Speaker C: Say you're not colonizing doesn't mean you're not a colonizer. I think it's important to help people who are starving.
[00:52:10] Speaker B: Write it. Writing it down on a little piece of paper is not enough.
[00:52:13] Speaker C: Not in this courtroom.
[00:52:14] Speaker A: It has to be a big piece of paper. Kennedy.
Space lost.
Space is huge. Earth is small. That's why we have a little piece of paper in space.
[00:52:24] Speaker B: People are. People are devaluing. Writing something down on a little piece of paper. But when Google took down the little piece of paper that said don't be evil, things did happen.
All right, Link, I've just got one final question for you today.
[00:52:40] Speaker A: This is your time to vote. Vote is at home.
[00:52:43] Speaker C: I'm ready.
[00:52:44] Speaker B: Does the predator need a hunting license?
[00:52:46] Speaker C: Depends on the jurisdiction.
[00:52:50] Speaker B: Fair enough, Link, you've been a wonderful guest today. This is so much fun. Thank you for letting us esther you with goofy space law questions for the past hour. You have been a delight and an entertainment. Remind people again where do they find you on Twitter and stuff?
[00:53:10] Speaker C: Yeah, you can find me on Twitter, Instagram at K N I L I R A B A J.
Or you could just Google Google AJ AJ link on the Internet. AJ link Space law if you want to be specific and I will pop up.
[00:53:26] Speaker A: Justice.
Justice.
[00:53:29] Speaker B: Space justice. Thank you so much for joining us today. Voters at home thank you for voting along with us as always and we will be back with you again next.
[00:53:38] Speaker A: Week by space Ever.
