The UN Needs To Reconsider Its Rules Governing The Ownership And Sovereignty Of Space

From article, Who Owns the Moon? | Space Law & Outer Space Treaties
(The Outer Space Treaty was ratified in 1967, largely based on a set of legal principles the general assembly accepted in 1962.
...It should be emphasized again that the U.N. treaties are nonbinding, but there is a sort of international pressure by other nations when a nation strays from the principles.
The treaty has several major points to it. Some of the principal ones are:
Space is free for all nations to explore, and sovereign claims cannot be made. Space activities must be for the benefit of all nations and humans. (So, nobody owns the moon.)
Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction are not allowed in Earth orbit, on celestial bodies or in other outer-space locations. (In other words, peace is the only acceptable use of outer-space locations).
Individual nations (states) are responsible for any damage their space objects cause. Individual nations are also responsible for all governmental and nongovernmental activities conducted by their citizens. These states must also "avoid harmful contamination" due to space activities.
Boundary disputes and property rights. For the moment, the Outer Space Treaty says that space and celestial bodies cannot be claimed by other nations, but it is unclear how these provisions would apply to private companies. The U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (see above) does not allow for territorial claims. But with nations talking about landing on places such as the moon and Mars, it is unclear how the exploitation rights and the property rights would work in the case of adjacent colonies. Some suggest that Antarctica, a territory owned by no nation and used mainly for scientific purposes, could be a model to follow — but not everyone agrees...
...It should be emphasized again that the U.N. treaties are nonbinding, but there is a sort of international pressure by other nations when a nation strays from the principles.)

Me, "My point in the above quotes is your going to have a lot of countries exploring space. People are going to want to live out there. All you have to do is look at world history to see that a lot of exploration was done to find resources. Towns, cities, states, countries, developed from this.
So, where we went from no private or public use of space resources in the early 1960's, now in the 2020's, the whole idea of living permanently in space and can you own something comes up. If you live in some kind of country's or mining's colony, which country's laws do you follow? The UN needs to reconsider its rules governing the ownership and sovereignty of space.
Personally, I think any country, or private company has the right to own a piece of property out in space.
It doesn't make sense not too. In fact it would lead to more peaceful cooperation between countries here on Earth. There are a lot of countries on Earth looking for new resources and butting heads with their neighbors. It's a very tough fact to contemplate.
Space, on the other hand, is a HUGE place.
You mean to tell me if a country can own a piece of land in space, either as a new colony or as a new piece of that country it would lead to more fighting for resources here on Earth? Of course not. It would lead to more countries wanting to develop space travel to bring back to it new resources from space. There would be an end to most wars because there would be less of a need to fight over resources.
The only reason countries have been willing to use Antarctica, only for research, is because no sane person wants to live there!! Space is different. Space, is huge. And the opportunities are endless. Should we live by a 1960's point of view or rearrange our thinking in 2016?
I think we really need to manage space better. We should come up with rules about how much, a year, per say, a country is allowed to claim land on other moons and planets. Outerspace colonies? How many can each country build a year?
Can another nation's astronaut flying on a NASA mission make a territory claim for another country?
There are a lot more questions here. I am for expanison of countries in space because I know a lot of countries here are running low on resources and space is filled with them. Owning space is not something to be feared. It's something we are going to have to deal with at some point.
Better to make the rules now so Earth countries know how to proceed, other wise we could have a wild west in space. (Remember Russia planting it's flag at the arctic? Or a country building islands at sea?) Even, future colonies could decide they'd rather go it alone because the rules on space ownership are convoluted. We could have an independence war in space. It would be a shame.