BTW, I never see any reports on the relatively short lifespan of PV cell panels. They lose their effectiveness largely after 5 years of exposure.
According to this one, most manufacturers warrant that their panels will still produce at least 80% of their rated power after 25 years. Your statement about largely losing effectiveness in 5 years is misinformed at best.
Can we safely assume, the treaty favors businessmen of first-world countries who will use public resources to mine the minerals but keep the profits to themselves?
I'm sure we can trust the government to prevent such abuses.
I didn't post the link earlier, but the International Seabed Authority already exists to regulate mining of the seabed, including in international waters. I expect lunar and asteroid mining to fall under a similar authority. (Assuming either ever becomes practical.)
I thought at one point in time, it was agreed on that no single nation "owned" the moon. Therefore, what happens if someone goes up there for a commercial project and sells material gathered there? Is it "first come, first to profit"?
Article II: "Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means."
Article I says, in part, "Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law". I would look to maritime law regarding resources in international waters as a basis for how lunar resources might be handled.
Article VI says, in part, "States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty." Since this is a US company they will need authorization from and supervision by the federal government.
The question then becomes; is it bad if Mozilla were gone? What is the added value of Mozilla and their products right now?
Without Mozilla the Microsoft/Google/Apple triumvirate will control all browser standards. I think Mozilla brings a different perspective that would be missed. It would be nice if Firefox OS gained enough traction to make a similar difference in mobile but the chance of that happening seems slim.
Never ask two questions in a business letter. The reply will discuss the one you are least interested, and say nothing about the other.
