The short version

• Space Law Journal is running an interview series with the people who write, apply and argue about space law.
• We are looking for regulators, in-house counsel, private practice lawyers, insurers, academics and operators.
• Interviews run 800 to 1,500 words, are conducted by email or call, and you see the copy before it publishes.
• To take part, write to space@legaldesire.com with the subject line Interview.

Most writing about space law describes rules. Very little of it describes what happens when someone has to apply one.

That gap is what this series is for.

What we want to ask

We are less interested in a summary of the Outer Space Treaty than in the questions that only come up when you are actually doing the work.

What does an FAA means of compliance negotiation actually feel like from the applicant’s side? How does a regulator decide what counts as enough information in a debris analysis? What does an underwriter look at first on a new bus with no flight heritage? How does a national administration prioritise between two domestic applicants competing for the same ITU filing slot? What did the DISH consent decree change inside compliance teams, if anything?

Those answers are not in the rule text. They are held by a few hundred people worldwide and they get shared over coffee at conferences.

Who we would like to hear from

• Regulators and agency staff, current or former, at the FCC, FAA, Office of Space Commerce, UK CAA, EUSPA, national space agencies, IN-SPACe and elsewhere
• In-house counsel at operators, manufacturers, launch providers and ground segment companies
• Private practice lawyers in satellite regulatory, launch licensing, export control, space finance and disputes
• Insurance and finance professionals, underwriters, brokers and satellite finance specialists
• Academics working on space resources, debris governance, military uses and the delimitation question
• Operators and engineers who deal with the regulatory interface directly

We are particularly interested in hearing from outside the usual Washington and Brussels axis. The Indian, Japanese, Australian, New Zealand, Emirati and African regimes are under-covered relative to how much is happening in them.

How it works

Format. Between six and ten questions, answered by email or over a call that we transcribe. Published length is typically 800 to 1,500 words.

Timing. We send questions within a week of agreeing to run the interview. There is no deadline pressure on your side.

Approval. You see the full edited copy before it publishes. We will not publish a quote you have not signed off. If something you said on a call is better left out, it comes out.

Attribution. On the record by default, with your name, role and organisation. If your employer requires review, tell us at the start and we will build the timeline around it. We can run an interview on background where the subject genuinely requires it, but we prefer not to.

Editing. We edit for length and clarity, not for position. We will not sharpen your view to make better copy.

A note on what this section is not

Some publications run interviews that are effectively sponsored profiles. This is not that.

We do not charge to publish an interview, we do not accept payment for one, and we will not run a piece that reads as marketing for a product or a firm. If the honest answer to a question is that a rule is working well, we will print that. If the honest answer is that it is not, we will print that too.

Get in touch

Write to space@legaldesire.com with the subject line Interview. Tell us who you are, what you work on, and one thing about your area that you think is widely misunderstood. That last part is usually where the interesting interview is hiding.

If you would rather write than be interviewed, our submissions guidelines set out what we publish and how to pitch.