I’m not a real lawyer; I only play one on the internet:
I am not sure that abandonment is necessarily true. Among the equipment left behind are mirrors that are occasionally used to measure the distance from the Earth to the Moon. The use of that equipment may demonstrate that it is not abandoned but is part of ongoing research.

It is much like the USGS survey markers on mountain tops. There may be no one there to guard them, but they are used occasionally and are not abandoned hardware.

Whether the non-functional equipment around the Apollo mirrors would be considered as abandoned may be a different argument.

Here is a Smithsonian article on the topic:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/nasa-looks-to-protect-historic-sites-on-the-moon-47186092/?all
“To be sure, nations retain ownership of spacecraft and artifacts they leave on the moon, though it (and the planets) are common property, according to international treaties. In practical terms, that means no nation has jurisdiction over the lunar soil, upon which artifacts and precious footprints rest.”

Also from the Smithsonian article: “Without new international agreements, the norms governing lunar archaeology are likely to remain vague.”

A final quote from the Smithsonian article: “With no traffic cops on the moon, the only deterrent against damaging sites might be the prospect of negative publicity.“

So, in my words…we’re stuck with it, forever.)

OMG… just found another website I didn’t know existed–

United Nations: Office for Outer Space Affairs
http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/status/index.html

Jeez— I’m going to pray for a Borg Cube to come to Earth and remove the UN building from our home land and drop it in North Korea.

In the meantime, I guess I should probably read the Treaty.

Wayne: The UN Outer Space Treaty was ratified by the Senate. We are obliged to follow it. It does provide a method for getting out (a year notification) but to do that would require some courage by our elected leaders. I don’t yet see that kind of courage.

Q:
Did the Senate actually ratify that Moon Treaty, or what?

I’m under the impression, at least some of those type of “space” Treaties, were signed by us (USA) but not all of them were actually ratified by the Senate.
(and I’m too lazy to look it up right now)

Personally, I’d advocate abrogating any such Treaties.

Sure it does.

One of the provisions of the Moon Treaty is that it:

Bans any state from claiming sovereignty over any territory of celestial bodies.

I would argue that until that changes the Apollo hardware that is sitting on the Moon,
while built, paid for and sent there by the US does not mean it still owns it but rather
simply abandoned it there and therefore its open season on whomever wants it.

I hope this stands, but the Feds always (always) appeal; they have unlimited time, resources, and staff. And they hate to lose. (They will make you their personal-hobby with the weight of the Government behind them.)

Don’t have a good link handy, but– look into the Case(s) of the ten, 1933 “Double Eagle” gold coins that were confiscated by the Feds not too long ago.

The Mint produced thousands of gold double-eagles dated 1933, but FDR ordered the seizure of all gold coins & bullion from the public. The Mint melted almost all of them; one specimen was lawfully exported and given to a middle eastern dictator. It showed up 50 years later & the Feds moved to seize it. After a lengthy court battle, it was auctioned off and the Feds split the cash with the owner. (we’re talking in excess of 10 million dollars for one coin.)

Then, about 10-15 years ago, the family of a deceased rare coin dealer [Israel “Izzy” Switt] discovered 10 specimens of the 1933 coins in storage. They foolishly sent them to the Mint for authentication, and they were hoping to cut a similar deal as before.
The Feds seized them all on the grounds they were “illegally obtained & unlawful to posses.”
Lengthy (multi-year) Court battle ensued. Initial ruling’s were favorable to the Switt family, but in the end, they were seized. (and zero compensation.)

Nancy Carlson— she should report that bag as stolen, and pretend it never existed. The Feds do not like to lose and will target her mercilessly.

Oh, no, that does not follow at all.

Granted a piece that was part of the Apollo 11 mission should be in a museum and does have historical
value. However, one can make this same argument for more than things that flew on the early moon shots.

For example, there are many one of a kind items in baseball history that one could argue should be
in Cooperstown instead of private collections. Should the people that own these items surrender them
under threat of legal action?

What will happen I wonder once we do return to the Moon to the Apollo landing sites? The surface of
the Moon, by treaty, belongs to all Mankind. It follows, that being the case, that anything that sits on
that surface does as well. Is NASA going to sue everybody who visits those sites in the future if they
decide to take those items that are there?