Connect with us

News

Startup fined $900k for launching illegal satellites, points to future space law challenges

Published

7 years ago

on

Swarm Technologies, Inc., a satellite startup aiming to create the world’s lowest-cost satellite network, has been fined $900,000 by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for illegally launching and deploying four unauthorized satellites into orbit in January 2018 on a commercial Indian satellite launch vehicle. The satellites in question were Swarm’s SpaceBEE vehicles, which measure one quarter the size of a traditional CubeSat, a class of small satellites measuring 10 cm in height, width, and depth. In December 2017, the FCC deemed the SpaceBEE size too small for the U.S. Air Force’s traditional technology to track with routine methods and declined a license, but the satellites were placed into orbit regardless. With satellite and rocket launch startups proliferating as space access becomes more affordable, the debate over ensuring safety in this international arena is likely expand.

Swarm requested an experimental license from the FCC in April 2017, a first step for any satellite operator to ensure compliance with current international space laws, and their plan was to launch in September 2017, although that date was later delayed. Spaceflight Industries was next hired to connect Swarm with a launch provider and ensure its integration with the rest of the rocket’s payload. After the FCC declined the license in December 2017, Swarm applied for a new license in January 2018 for satellites meeting CubeSat specifications, but the original SpaceBEEs were already loaded onto the contracted Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) and subsequently launched on January 12, 2018.

When news of the SpaceBEE deployment broke, concerns over regulatory backlash spread throughout the satellite community. The FCC issued an Enforcement Advisory on April 12, 2018 warning about consequences for communications companies failing to comply with licensing requirements, including a note to launch providers on how launch activities may be impacted if an unauthorized satellite payload needs to be removed. In a decision released December 20, 2018, Swarm Technologies was ordered to pay the fine and implement a five-year compliance plan.

A depiction of Swarm’s SpaceBEE satellites, from their FCC license application. | Credit: Swarm Technologies/FCC

Since the very first satellite was successfully launched by the Soviet Union on October 4, 1957, activities in space have been largely conducted by national governments and companies affiliated with them. However, the new space era is quickly changing that environment, rapidly opening up the beyond-Earth domain to private citizens. Billionaires like Elon Musk of Tesla and SpaceX, Jeff Bezos of Amazon and Blue Origin, and Richard Branson of Virgin and Virgin Galactic have mostly been the face of private/commercial space industry in recent years, but the technologies they’ve developed are also ushering in a new wave of affordable access to space, and with it, new technologies that don’t fit the traditional mold of “old space”.

The legal foundation for current space laws is the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, i.e., the “Outer Space Treaty”. Under this Treaty and subsequent treaties and laws arising from it, states, or nations, rather, are responsible for any space activities conducted by their own nationals, meaning a regulatory process that must be enforced. Where access to space was once expensive and difficult, the significantly lowered threshold has brought in a field full of players ready to take their shot at participating in the coming space economy and maybe, as seen with Swarm Technologies, even take a few risks to get there.

While the illegal launch of Swarm’s satellites was caught rather quickly (first by the community of amateur space trackers) and action was taken to penalize it, what’s to stop nations in the future from lowering standards to attract private customers? As stated in the FCC’s Enforcement Advisory, “Satellites authorized by an administration other than the United States do not require any FCC approval if Earth station operations are exclusively outside the United States.” Pressure from the international community to comply with treaties will only work to the extent that 1) the penalties deter the profit potential from the industry; 2) the international community agrees the activity is actually unsafe; and 3) the resistance to reforming regulations to permit the activity in question is deemed justified. Innovation, especially out of Silicon Valley, has a history of breaking rules to bring about significant change; however, some would argue that space isn’t the place for that approach.

Advertisement
The thrice-flown, Falcon 9 Block 5 rocket that put Swarm’s recent 3 satellites in orbit (all FCC approved): SpaceBEE-5, 6, and 7. | Credit: Pauline Acalin

The problem seems to be a simple matter of ethics: Don’t launch things into space that aren’t safe for Earth’s occupants. But according to the FCC, Swarm’s proposed satellites were merely “below the size threshold at which detection by the Space Surveillance Network (SSN) can be considered routine.” The licensing issue seemed to generally only be safety-related because of the satellites’ irregularity, not from the lack of actual tracking capability, something that is only going to increase as more players enter the new space arena.

Another point worth consideration is that Swarm’s SpaceBEE satellites are actually trackable using the same SSN network the FCC cited in its rejection of Swarm’s license request, and live tracking is ongoing via an independent tracking service called LeoLabs. According to Dr. Sara Spangelo, one of the co-founders of Swarm Technologies, the satellites are equipped with radar retro-reflector technology, something developed by a US-Navy research and development lab, which makes their radar signature as bright as a CubeSat. The FCC has also granted the company a temporary experimental authorization to test the previously-illegal satellites’ orbital and tracking data. Thus, the question for the future is not so much whether the safety concerns are valid, but whether preventative rules will be waived where newer technology can demonstrate their compliance outside traditional standards.

Related Topics:

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Jim Cramer chimes in on Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s pay package

“Don’t be small-minded: Tesla is about robots, Full Self-Driving, the future. Give him his package.”

Published

11 hours ago

on

October 23, 2025

By

Credit: The Street

Investor and host of Mad Money on MSNBC , Jim Cramer, has chimed in on Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s pay package and whether it should be rewarded to the frontman or not.

Cramer has drawn a lot of attention regarding his sentiments on Tesla, as investors have routinely given him a pretty hard time over what he’s said about the company.

For the past few years, we have covered his comments on Tesla when he has something to say, mostly because his opinion on the stock seems to change pretty frequently; at a minimum, he has something different to say about it every few months.

However, Cramer knows Musk’s value to Tesla, and said on Thursday that he believes the CEO deserves his pay package:

“Don’t be small-minded: Tesla is about robots, Full Self-Driving, the future. Give him his package.”

Advertisement

Cramer’s comments come just one day after Tesla’s Q3 2025 Earnings Call, where Musk took several opportunities to call out the importance of the pay package and how it could impact the company’s future — with or without him.

Musk said at one point that he would not feel comfortable continuing to develop the company’s massive fleet of Optimus bots without having appropriate control of the company from a voting perspective.

He said he does not want so much power that if he “were to lose his mind,” he could not be removed. However, he does feel he needs to be protected from “activist shareholders,” or “corporate terrorists” like proxy groups Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis:

Advertisement

“My fundamental concern with regard to how much voting control I have at Tesla is if I go ahead and build this enormous robot army, can I just be ousted at some point in the future? …It’s just, if we build this robot army, do I have at least a strong influence over that robot army, not current control, but a strong influence? That’s what it comes down to in a nutshell. I don’t feel comfortable wielding that robot army if I don’t have at least a strong influence.”

At the end of the call, Musk said:

“Like I said, I just don’t feel comfortable building a robot army here and then being ousted because of some asinine recommendations from ISS and Glass Lewis, who have no freaking clue. I mean, those guys are corporate terrorists.”

Cramer is one of many who realize Musk’s importance to Tesla, and how the company would likely lack the guidance and prowess it does without his planning and drive. However, Tesla shareholders will have the ultimate say on November 6 when they vote on Musk’s compensation plan.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla is stumped on how to engineer this Optimus part, but they’re close

Published

12 hours ago

on

October 23, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has been stumped on how to engineer one crucial part of the Optimus bot, but CEO Elon Musk says the company is “on the cusp” of achieving something great with the project.

During the Q3 2025 Earnings Call, Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed the company is moving closer to a major breakthrough with the Optimus project, and said they are “on the cusp of something really tremendous.”

However, it seems there is one specific portion of the robot that has truly stumped engineers at the company: the hand, fingers, and forearm.

Musk went into great detail about how incredibly complex and amazing the human hand is, highlighting its dexterity and capability, as its ability to perform a wide variety of tasks is especially impressive:

“I don’t want to downplay the difficulty, but it’s an incredibly difficult thing, especially to create a hand that is as dexterous and capable as the human hand, which is incredible. The human hand is an incredible thing. The more you study the human hand, the more incredible you realize it is, and why you need four fingers and a thumb, why the fingers have certain degrees of freedom, why the various muscles are of different strengths, and fingers are of different lengths. It turns out that those are all there for a reason.”

Advertisement

It’s been pretty apparent that Tesla has made massive strides in the Optimus project, especially considering it has been able to walk down hills, learn things like Kung Fu, and even perform service tasks like serving food and drinks.

However, a recent look at a Gen 2.5 version of Optimus posted by Marc Benioff, the CEO of Salesforce, showed that Tesla was likely using mannequin hands until it developed something that was both useful and aesthetically pleasing:

Advertisement

Musk continued on the call last night that the Tesla team was confronted with an “incredibly difficult” challenge from an engineering perspective, and the hands and actuators for that specific part were tough to figure out:

“Making the hand and forearm, because most of the actuators, just like the human hand, the muscles that control your hand are actually primarily in your forearm. The Optimus hand and forearm is an incredibly difficult engineering challenge. I’d say it’s more difficult than the rest of the robot from an electromechanical standpoint. The forearm and hand are more difficult than the entire rest of the robot. But really, in order to have a useful generalized robot, you do need an incredible hand.”

The CEO continued that developing a useful and effective robot was “crucial to the future of the company,” and that he works with Optimus’s design team each Friday night.

Continue Reading

News

Elon Musk sets definitive Tesla Cybercab production date and puts a rumor to rest

“The single biggest expansion in production will be the Cybercab, which starts production in Q2 next year.” -Elon Musk

Published

14 hours ago

on

October 23, 2025

By

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla CEO Elon Musk finally set a definitive date for Tesla Cybercab production and, at the same time, put a substantial rumor regarding the vehicle that has been circulating within the community to rest.

Tesla’s Cybercab was unveiled last October as the company’s two-seater, affordable option that would ultimately be the car used for autonomous travel. It was initially slated for production in late 2025 or early 2026.

Tesla is ramping up its hiring for the Cybercab production team

However, Tesla has finally said it will start production of the Cybercab in Q2 2026, a more concrete date for the company, as it has moved the entire project forward in recent weeks by testing it at the Fremont Test Track and conducting crash safety assessments.

Musk said on the Q3 2025 Earnings Call:

Advertisement

“The single biggest expansion in production will be the Cybercab, which starts production in Q2 next year. That’s really a vehicle that’s optimized for full autonomy. It, in fact, does not have a steering wheel or pedals and is really an enduring optimization on minimizing cost per mile for fully considered cost per mile of operation.”

In that quote, Musk also put a rumor that has been circulating within the community to rest. Some started to speculate whether Cybercab would be sold with a steering wheel and pedals, as many of the elements of the car seemed to hint toward not being exclusively autonomous, including side mirrors being equipped, among other things.

Advertisement

It has been interesting to see some consider whether Tesla would sell the vehicle with the elements that would enable human control, especially as there have been a handful of images of the vehicle on company property with a steering wheel spotted.

However, Musk doubled down on the autonomous nature of the Cybercab with this confirmation during the earnings call, something that many investors likely wanted to hear because it was, in a way, a vote of confidence for the company’s path to autonomy.

Continue Reading

Trending