Introduction

In recent years, outer space has transformed dramatically from a government-dominated domain into a dynamic arena of global innovation and collaboration. Organizations like National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”), European Space Agency (“ESA”), Indian Space Research Organisation (“ISRO”), SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Skyroot Aerospace are pushing boundaries to explore what lies beyond our planet.

The surge in space exploration has spurred an increased reliance on advanced technologies, ranging from communication satellites and artificial intelligence to spacecraft propulsion systems and space mining tools. These breakthroughs, born out of intense research and development, warrant robust intellectual property (“IPR”) protection.

However, while IPR laws are well-established on Earth, their application in outer space remains legally complex and largely untested. This is especially critical for countries like India, which is still in the process of developing comprehensive national space legislation. As India promotes more private-sector participation and foreign collaborations in space, the absence of a clear IPR framework risks disputes, loss of proprietary knowledge, and investor hesitancy.

Despite the global expansion of space exploration, the legal framework governing IPR in space remains largely unregulated. The cornerstone of international space law, the Outer Space Treaty 1967 (“OST”)ii, enshrines the principle of non-appropriation of outer space and celestial bodies, promoting peaceful international cooperation. One notable omission in the treaty is the lack of an explicit reference to trademark issues or mechanisms for protecting inventions made in outer space. The gap creates substantial loopholes in the protection of the IPR rights related to space-based inventions.

This legal vacuum raises critical questions:

  • Jurisdiction: Whose laws govern inventions made in space? Does the flag of the registering country apply?
  • Enforcement: How can rights like patents and copyrights be enforced in a domain where no single jurisdiction holds sovereignty?
  • Ownership: In multi-country missions, who owns the resulting innovations?

These uncertainties are particularly pertinent for India, given its increasing engagement with space-faring nations like the U.S. or Russia.

Existing Frameworks & Approaches:

Currently, the IPR in outer space is addressed through a fragmented system of international treaties, national laws, and ad hoc agreements. However, none of these legal instruments offers a comprehensive or harmonised solution to the complex IPR challenges emerging from outer space activities. Internationally, the OST remains the cornerstone of space law. Although it does not explicitly address intellectual property, Article VIIIiii of the OSTiv provides that the launching state retains jurisdiction and control over the object it launches into outer space, regardless of its location. This provision has often been interpreted to mean that IP generated on a space object would be subject to the laws of the country that registered the space object. However, this interpretation remains legally untested in many jurisdictions and may be inadequate when multinational crews, companies, or payloads are involved.

Further complexities arise in collaborative environments, such as the International Space Station (“ISS”). The Intergovernmental Agreement, 1998v (“IGA”), signed by the United States, Russia, Canada, Japan, and European Space Agency, provides a framework for determining ownership in shared space operations. Under the IGA, the jurisdiction is assigned based on national modules, meaning each country retains authority over its segment of the ISS.

Some countries have attempted to address this broader gap through domestic legislation. Notably, the United States extended its patent law to outer space through 35 U.S.C. § 105vi, ensuring that inventions made on any U.S.-registered spacecraft are protected under U.S. patent law. This proactive legal measure offers a model for other nations to consider, enabling inventors and companies to secure enforceable rights even when their innovation occurs in orbit.

Other spacefaring nations, such as Russia and members of the European Union, also have frameworks that regulate space-related technology transfers. However, there remains no international consensus on how IPR should be protected or enforced in space.

The World Intellectual Property Organisation (“WIPO”), a specialised UN agency, though not space-specific, plays a critical role in facilitating global cooperation on IPR issues. WIPO administers treaties such as the Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”)vii and the Budapest Treaty, which streamline multinational patent filings viii and the recognition of biological deposits. With the increasing involvement of private actors and the rise of dual-use technologies (civil and military), there is growing support for WIPO to lead the development of new treaties or guidelines specifically focusing on outer space activities.

The Indian Context:

India’s legal framework for intellectual property, principally governed by the Patents Act, 1970, ix and the Copyright Act, 1957x, does not address intellectual property generated in outer space, whether in the form of inventions or copyrightable works. While India is a member of WTO’s TRIPS Agreement concerning the protection of intellectual property and Paris Convention on Industrial Propertyxi, there is presently no Indian legislation that addresses the legal status of inventions made in outer space or governs the management of intellectual property generated during space missions, especially those conducted in collaboration with other entities,

Without legal safeguards in place, the risk of exploitation by foreign collaborators exploiting Indian ingenuity increases. Rises. Freelancers, researchers, and startups remain highly vulnerable to IP theft or undervaluation of their work in international engagements.

India must shape a regulatory framework that facilitates the development of commercial infrastructure in outer space. One key step could be to adopt policies similar to § 105 of U.S.C 35, which extends US patent law to inventions made abroad US spacecrafts. India could implement similar legislation to ensure that its patent laws apply to inventions developed aboard Indian-registered spacecraft, just as existing Indian laws provide protection for trademarks and rights even in international waters or airspace.

In addition, India should establish specialised institutional mechanisms to govern IPRs in both regional and multinational space missions. This would involve clearly defining jurisdictional control, setting up conflict resolution frameworks, and outlining commercialisation policies for space-based technologies. Without such measures, innovations developed through Indian talent in space may be undervalued or even appropriated by foreign actors, thereby jeopardising India’s growing status as a space-faring nation.

As India ascends in the global space race, its legal regime must evolve to protect innovations in space. A future-ready IP framework is essential for fostering innovation and collaboration in space-based ventures.

  1. Dedicated Space IP Law: Enact a space-activities specific legislation with specific IPR provisions, extending Indian IP jurisdiction to Indian-registered spacecraft and platforms, with necessary amendments to existing laws.
  2. Pre-Launch IPR Agreements: Institutionalise a pre-launch contract modelled after the ISS Intergovernmental Agreement to define IP ownership, licensing rights, and dispute resolution in joint missions, particularly when working with international partners.
  3. Global Governance Role: India can play a leadership role in WIPO to advocate for a standardized global IP framework. This could take the form of a dedicated Space IPR Protocol or a TRIPS-plus agreement tailored for outer space activities.
  4. Tech-Driven IP Management: Employ emerging technologies such as blockchain to create and maintain transparent, real-time IP registries for space-based inventions, This would enable a tamper-proof management and licensing rights in orbit.
  5. Capacity Building: Promote legal awareness and capacity-building through education and training, integrating Space IP modules into universities and establishing specialised IP cells within ISRO and IN-SPACe.

India must act now to secure its innovations in orbit by blending law, diplomacy, and technology to protect its scientific achievements in the final frontier.

Conclusion:

As India boldly enters the new space age, with rising private participation and international collaboration, it can no longer afford to leave intellectual property rights unprotected in orbit,

both literally and legally. The vast potential of space-based innovation, whether in AI-driven satellites, propulsion systems, or space mining, demands a legal regime that is as advanced and futuristic as the technology it seeks to protect.

The absence of clear IPR guidelines in space not only creates a vacuum in enforcement and ownership but also risks undermining investor confidence, stifling innovation, and enabling foreign exploitation of Indian ingenuity. India must seize this pivotal moment by enacting a comprehensive Space Activities Act that includes explicit provisions on intellectual property. Expanding the reach of its Patents and Copyright Acts to cover outer space and establishing a dedicated IP wing within ISRO would lay the groundwork for a future-ready legal framework. Additionally, India should take the lead in shaping an international IPR regime for space, one that promotes fairness, transparency, and accountability across nations and orbits. In the race to harness the final frontier, the protection of intellectual capital is not a luxury, it is a necessity. For India to emerge not just as a participant but as a global leader in space innovation, it must ground its ambitions in a solid, strategic legal foundation.

References:

ii Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, Jan. 27, 1967, 18 U.S.T. 2410, 610 U.N.T.S. 205 [hereinafter Outer Space Treaty].
iii https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html
v Agreement Among the Government of Canada, Governments of Member States of the European Space Agency, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the United States of America Concerning Cooperation on the Civil International Space Station, Jan. 29, 1998.
vi https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:35%20section:105%20edition:prelim)
vii https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/registration/pct/
ix The Patents Act, No. 39 of 1970, India Code (as amended by The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005).
x The Copyright Act, No. 14 of 1957, India Code (as amended by The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012).
xi Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, Mar. 20, 1883, as revised at Stockholm, July 14, 1967, 21 U.S.T. 1583, 828 U.N.T.S. 305.
xiii  Dep’t of Space, Gov’t of india, Draft Spac Activities Bill (2017),

Gaurav Gupta is the Founder and Managing Partner at Bridge Counsels & Pranathi Prasad, is a fourth- year student of B. Com LLB at BMS Law College, Bengaluru, and interned at Bridge Counsels.