CYIL Vol. 4, 2013

JAN ONDŘEJ CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ including on celestial bodies or on spacecraft, which are under the jurisdiction and control of one or more member states in accordance with international law”. The proposal of the EC/EU regulation contains the formulation jurisdiction and control deriving from Article VIII of the Space Treaty. Conditions for granting a patent in the proposal are the same as in Articles 52-57 of the European Patent Convention of 1973. The US Patent Law and the proposed EC Regulation are based on jurisdiction and have therefore the same foundation. Concepts of protection of the rights to inventions differ between the USA, Europe and Japan, and these differences can lead to certain difficulties. The US system is/was based on the principle first to invent . It means that the decisive point is to prove who first made the invention. The European and Japanese regulation is based on the first to file 59 principle . The decisive principle for protection is the fact of who first had the invention registered. Under the framework of the International Space Station, where the USA, Russia, European states, Japan and Canada participate, the problem arises of safeguarding the secrecy of certain information for reason of its protection. Secrecy is not always possible, 60 because the members of the crew from various partner states have access to all kinds of information. Protection of intellectual property is necessary during the conduct of space activities – apart from other reasons, because of the ever increasing participation of the private sector in space activities, which will require adequate guarantees of protection of their interests according to national or international legislation. 61 The above mentioned EC regulation on patents, which refers to inventions made in outer space, could strengthen the possibilities of protection of inventions which are being made in space. So far this is only a proposal which has been discussed in the EU Council since 18 May 2004. It is, therefore, questionable when the regulation will be passed. Conclusion We can conclude by saying that private property ownership can be applied in relation to outer space and celestial bodies. The application of these claims, however, should be in accordance with the prohibition of appropriation which is expressed in the basic document which regulates the area of outer space and celestial bodies, that is, in accordance with the Space Treaty of 1967. This treaty contains the basic principles which can be used without problem also for future development. The advantage of the general regulation which came into existence in a particular historic period is its possible application to new specific issues that did not exist in that earlier time. The pre-condition, however, is interpretation and application in accordance with the subject and purpose of the treaty. We can state that the basic provisions of 59 See Sgrosso, G. C. Applicable Jurisdiction Conflicts in the International Space Station. 43rd Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, Rio de Janeiro, 2000, p. 181. 60 ibid . 61 ibid ., p. 179.