it would be possible to invoke the Liability Convention, as will be explained below. Second, turning from the space object to its capture and transmission of solar energy, would there be liability for damage on the part of the owners or operators of the space object if harms were produced through causing exposure to the object's microwave transmissions? To this two answers can be given. As stated in a preceding chapter, at the present there are no internationally agreed on standards relating to the amount of microwave radiation that animals, plants, and inanimate objects can safely receive. In the absence of such international standards it could be argued that there could be no international legal liability. There could be no liability if there were no measurable standard of harm. On the other hand, there is a general expectation of prudence on the part of those who use possibly dangerous substances or instrumentalities. To understand the present state of the law on this matter will require an assessment of the two treaties mentioned above. Third, again with reference to the transmission of energy in the form of radio broadcasts on assigned gigahertz frequencies, the question to be asked relates to tort liability for harmful interference with other broadcasts on the same frequencies, or, more generally, to the adverse effects of potentially harmful space activities. As in the preceding question the assumption is that the space object, which has been defined to include component parts, thereby includes the broadcasting equipment situated on or within the object. This, also, will require an assessment of the two treaties. In this case a sub-issue exists. Are money damages the proper remedy for harmful interference, or is the offended State
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==