By: Sofia Martinez-Guasch
Unsurprisingly, the two richest men in the world are at the forefront of attempting to provide global internet connections. Elon Musk’s, Starlink, and Jeff Bezos’, Kuiper, have been working with the federal regulators to launch satellites into low Earth orbits approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). With both space-based internet projects deploying satellites into an area of space that’s already the most crowded–orbits below 2,000 km–, the increasing risk of interference and satellite jamming are of concern globally. International space law, however, requires the establishment of all satellite communications in a way that does not cause harmful interference of other countries or recognized agencies.
Commercial communication satellite systems have long been monitored by international law policies given that the systems work in an area that is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of countries. Space law itself is recognized as international law established through treaties, often generated by the United Nations (UN). The 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which has been ratified by 103 countries, establishes outer space as a “global commons.” It is “not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” The treaty’s purpose is to promote the equal use and exploration of outer space and consequently, any limits to the freedom of operating satellites must be agreed upon by international law. This includes customary international law, which isn’t necessarily ratified like treaties.
The Outer Space Treaty also establishes that individual countries have full responsibility to ensure their governmental and non-governmental activities are not violating international legal obligations. For this reason, the FCC in the U.S. is the agency responsible for authorizing and supervising satellite communications for non-governmental entities. One way the agency does so is by requiring private companies to apply for a license, granting them the right to conduct space activity in a particular orbit.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a UN technical agency, is the leading international agency that ensures global communications are running effectively. The ITU coordinates satellites’ global radio spectrum for different services and organizations and assigns satellites to orbital slots stationed in GEO orbit. Additionally, the ITU has set the global technical standard for the use, assignment, and allocation of radio frequencies.
More importantly, the ITU is responsible for ensuring that satellite signals are functioning accordingly to their proposed plan and not being interfered with. That is, when the ITU assigns a specific signal, that signal is recorded in the Master International Frequency Register, which thereby grants the assigning user a right to “international recognition”. Such recognition provides the user with protection against “interference”, defined as interference with a radio signal that endangers the function of, “or seriously degrades, obstructs, or repeatedly interrupts a radio communication service operating under ITU regulations.”
Unlike typical satellites that use ground stations on Earth to send and receive signals, Elon Musk’s comms venture uses one Starlink satellite in conjunction with another four of its satellites to send laser signals between each other. That is, no ground stations are required to provide internet access and the use of laser signals strives to increase data speeds. To use Starlink’s internet services, consumers have to pay $499 for a terminal in addition to a $90 subscription fee. So instead of relying on enormous ground stations scattered around the country to receive end signals, consumers can directly purchase these terminals to “end” signals from its low-orbit satellites. Space X’s, Starlink, plans to launch up to 12,000 initial satellites, 1,000 of which are already in orbit per a license the tech company obtained from the FCC in 2020. Amazon’s, Kuiper uses similar satellite technology to provide broadband internet service, planning to launch over 3,000 satellites in space.
However, recently, the two tech-giants have been butting heads as Space X seeks to modify its already-approved license. Space X requested the FCC’s approval to move its current satellites into lower orbits than originally planned, potentially overlapping with orbits where Amazon has its satellites. Space X’s request allegedly comes from the need to modify their design systems. Amazon on the other hand claims that their competitor’s request is “too significant” to be considered a simple modification. Bezos’ corporate counsel recommends that the FCC consider Starlink as “a newly designed system” having to go through the broader regulatory schemes as Space X initially did when they first submitted their request. While the conflict between the two big tech companies may seem like a bidding war for real estate, the conflict raises several international law implications worth carefully considering.
SpaceX’s and Amazon’s efforts to provide global internet communications, after other companies have gone bankrupt due to their unsuccessful efforts, has huge implications on the international economy. As an initial matter, commercial satellite communications provide for some of today’s most essential services: instant sharing of economic, social, political, and human information (the Internet), voice, data, and mobile networks, and financial transactions between banks. An attempt to provide these services for the entire world is not only a big ask but requires thousands of satellites (known as “constellations” in the industry) that are more likely to interfere with each other, thereby degrading or interrupting their service.
Of more concern is that as SpaceX and Amazon begin releasing their services to the public–and the number of satellites in orbit increases exponentially–satellites are more likely to interfere with other, more reliable, commercial satellites. When other high-functioning commercial satellites are interfered with (such as GPS), companies and governments around the world using these signals would suffer devastating losses.
While the FCC has authorized the launch of Starlink and Kuiper in accordance with licensing schemes required by the Outer Space Treaty, their potential to interfere may violate the treaty’s policies on equal use. For example, if SpaceX lowers its satellites into an orbit that Amazon has already been assigned, then in theory, the right to recognition is turned into dust. Amazon no longer has the protection against interference and allowing SpaceX to deprive Amazon of this protection would risk setting a precedent for exempting certain commercial entities with satellites in orbits from the universal ITU standard…in a space that for years has and continues to embody impartiality.
Further, with so many internet satellites, these “constellations” may outnumber the visible stars, potentially blocking out signals coming from further out in space. This would likely restrict astronomers’ use of outer space, impacting research of stars and outer space in both the private sphere and public sphere where communication is vital for many industries such as transportation and emergency services.
Under the ITU, the obstruction to these communications systems would have a serious enough impact on the international economy to constitute “harmful interference”, thereby violating its regulations. For the U.S., upholding the legal standards in space requires more than following federal regulator precedent. It requires looking at the legal, economical, and social implications of commercial space communication systems.
Student Bio: Sofia Martinez-Guasch is a second-year law student at Suffolk University Law School and serves as a Staff Member on the Journal of High Technology Law. Sofia holds a Bachelor of Arts in English and a minor in Law & Public Policy from Northeastern University
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
