温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.fr.com/insights/ip-law-essentials/ip-rights-outer-space
点击访问原文链接

They Came From Earth – IP Rights in Outer Space

进入原网站 导航首页
They Came From Earth – IP Rights in Outer Space Skip to Main Content Why Fish Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Pro Bono & Social Responsibility Legal Operations Pricing Legal Project Management Knowledge Management eDiscovery Legal Technology Services Our People Services Litigation Patent Litigation Trademark, Copyright & Media Litigation Trade Secret Litigation Appellate ITC Litigation & Section 337 Standard Essential Patents Chancery & Corporate Governance Post-Grant Inter Partes Review Post-Grant Review Ex Parte Reexamination Supplemental Examination Patent Patent Prosecution Strategic Patent Counseling & Opinions Patent Portfolio Management Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court IP Licensing, Transactions & Agreements Trademark & Copyright Counseling & Prosecution Strategic Counseling, Registration & Opinions Advertising & Marketing Domain Names & Internet TTAB Oppositions & Cancellations Digital Millennium Copyright Act Transactions & Agreements Regulatory & Government Affairs Communications & Spectrum Regulation Drug & Medical Device Regulation mHealth & Telemedicine Privacy & Data Security Industries Electrical & Computer Technology Software & Internet Hardware Semiconductors Consumer Electronics Optics Artificial Intelligence Digital Health Digital Media & E-Commerce Financial, Business & FinTech Services Telecommunications Energy & Chemicals Petrochemical Cleantech Life Sciences Biotech & Diagnostics Medical Devices Pharmaceuticals Academic Research & Medical Centers Transportation, Aerospace & Defense Manufacturing Autonomous Vehicles Insights Thought Leadership IP Law Essentials Post-Grant Annual Reports Webinars Podcasts Offices Careers News & Events Contact Us

IP Law Essentials May 15, 2020

They Came From Earth - IP Rights in Outer Space Home Insights IP Law Essentials They Came From Earth - IP Rights in Outer Space Authors Name Christopher O. Green Person title Principal Sixty-two years ago today, on May 15, 1958, the Soviet Union launched the Sputnik 3 satellite from a spaceport in Kazakhstan with a mission to conduct geophysical research of the upper atmosphere and near space.[1] Although an extraordinary step toward exploration and understanding of space at the time, its launch was not as ground-breaking as that of its predecessor Sputnik 1, the first artificial satellite to orbit Earth.[2] Weighing in at just 183.9 pounds[3], less than heavyweight boxers of the day, Sputnik 1 nonetheless punched well above its weight class by setting in motion many defining events in politics, science and the law: the Space Race[4], the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958[5], and the creation of National Aeronautics and Space Administration ("NASA").[6]

The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 ("Space Act of 1958") was drafted by the United States House Select Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration and was signed into law by President Eisenhower on July 29, 1958.[7] The Space Act of 1958 charged NASA with planning, directing, and conducting the aeronautical and space activities of the United States.[8]

Section 305 of the Space Act of 1958 titled, "Property Rights in Inventions" made extensive modifications to patent law and provided that both employee inventions, as well as private government contractor innovations, may be subject to government ownership.[9]

The Space Act of 1958 is now codified in Title 51 of the U.S. Code titled, "National and Commercial Space Programs." Specifically, 51 U.S.C. 20102 provides that "the aeronautical and space activities shall be conducted so as to contribute materially to one or more of the following objectives:"

The expansion of human knowledge of the Earth and of phenomena in the atmosphere and space.The improvement of the usefulness, performance, speed, safety, and efficiency of aeronautical and space vehicles.The development and operation of vehicles capable of carrying instruments, equipment, supplies, and living organisms through space.The establishment of long-range studies of the potential benefits to be gained from, the opportunities for, and the problems involved in the utilization of aeronautical and space activities for peaceful and scientific purposes.The preservation of the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology and in the application thereof to the conduct of peaceful activities within and outside the atmosphere.The making available to agencies directly concerned with national defense of discoveries that have military value or significance, and the furnishing by such agencies, to the civilian agency established to direct and control nonmilitary aeronautical and space activities, of information as to discoveries which have value or significance to that agency.Cooperation by the United States with other nations and groups of nations in work done pursuant to this chapter and in the peaceful application of the results thereof.The most effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of the United States, with close cooperation among all interested agencies of the United States in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, facilities, and equipment.The preservation of the United States preeminent position in aeronautics and space through research and technology development related to associated manufacturing processes.The search for life’s origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the universe.51 U.S.C. 20102.

Section 20135 of 51 U.S. Code, which is directed to intellectual property rights in inventions, remains largely unchanged from the Space Act of 1958 and grants the same broad authority of ownership to the government over both employee inventions as well as private government contractor innovations.

In particular, 51 U.S.C 20135 provides that an invention shall be the exclusive property of the United States if it is made in the performance of any work under any contract of NASA and if NASA determines that

the person who made the invention was employed or assigned to perform research, development, or exploration work and the invention is related to the work the person was employed or assigned to perform, or was within the scope of the person's employment duties, whether or not it was made during working hours, or with a contribution by the Government of the use of Government facilities, equipment, materials, allocated funds, information proprietary to the Government, or services of Government employees during working hours; orthe person who made the invention was not employed or assigned to perform research, development, or exploration work, but the invention is nevertheless related to the contract, or to the work or duties the person was employed or assigned to perform, and was made during working hours, or with a contribution from the Government as provided in item 1.51 U.S.C. 20135.

These provisions and NASA's authority to enter into contracts with third parties under 51U.S.C. 20113 can pose challenging issues of ownership and enforcement for those who wish to commercialize their space technology-related inventions.

We will explore these and other issues in our upcoming posts but for now we leave you with a suggestion to listen to Chris Hadfield's poignant cover of David Bowie's Space Oddity[10] while on board the International Space Station featuring out of this world shots of Earth.

[1] Melanie Whiting, 60 years ago, Soviets launch Sputnik 3 (May 15, 2018), https://www.nasa.gov/feature/60-years-ago-soviets-launch-sputnik-3.

[2] Steve Garber, Sputnik and the Dawn of the Space Age (October 10, 2007), https://history.nasa.gov/sputnik/.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Steven J. Dick, Why We Explore (March 28, 2008), https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/whyweexplore/Why_We_29.html [hereinafter Why We Explore].

[6] Id.

[7] Why We Explore, supra n.5.

[8] NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (Unamended) (July 29, 1958) https://history.nasa.gov/spaceact.html

[9] Id.

[10] Chris Hadfield, Space Oddity https://chrishadfield.ca/space-oddity/ (last visited May 7, 2020).

More questions? Contact the authors or visitFish's Intellectual Property Law Essentials.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors on the date noted above and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fish & Richardson P.C., any other of its lawyers, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This post is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.

Related Services Litigation More by same author(s) Article August 1, 2025 Analyzing SEPs: Strategies for Licensing Negotiations Read more Article March 25, 2025 Analyzing SEPs: Strategies to Avoid or Prepare for Litigation Read more Blog December 11, 2024 Introduction to SEP & FRAND Issues Read more Article August 12, 2024 Trade Secret Litigation: Strategic Use of Verdict Forms Read more Article August 27, 2020 Remote Proceedings Bring New Wrinkles For Court Records Read more Article August 20, 2020 Weighing The Virtual Courtroom Option in Civil Cases Read more Article July 7, 2020 Tips For Presenting A Credible Witness By Videoconference Read more Related thought leadership Blog February 24, 2026 The Shifting SEP Litigation Landscape: How Changes in the Types of Litigated SEPs Can Affect Implementers Read more Blog February 19, 2026 Be Careful What You Wish For: How Stipulations Become Federal Circuit Issues Read more Article February 13, 2026 Semiconductor Litigation: Advanced Process Transitions and the Next Wave of Patent Risk Read more Blog February 10, 2026 How To Kill a Weak Patent: 10 Strategies After Being Sued Read more Article February 9, 2026 Learning From a Typical Section 1782 Discovery Case Read more Blog February 5, 2026 Federal Circuit Signals Tension in Expert Testimony Jurisprudence: EcoFactor and Barry Read more Article February 4, 2026 Adding to the SEP Toolkit: AI and SEP Analysis Read more Blog January 30, 2026 D. Mass.: “Ensnarement” — a Potent but Often Overlooked Defense to the Doctrine of Equivalents — Need Not Be Raised in the Pleadings Read more Blog January 23, 2026 Protecting Your Edge: Detecting Trade Secret Risks and Preparing for Litigation Read more Blog January 20, 2026 Texas Round-Up: December 2025 Read more Offices Atlanta Austin Boston Chicago Dallas Delaware Houston Minneapolis Munich New York Orange County San Diego Shenzhen Silicon Valley Washington, D.C. Careers Life at Fish Judicial Clerks Law Students Lateral Hires Scientists & Engineers Operations & Admin Staff Training & Benefits FAQ Subscribe Contact Us Site Information Site Map Cookie Policy Disclaimer Privacy Policy Terms of Use

Copyright © 2026 Fish & Richardson P.C.

智能索引记录