After years of relative certainty about the broad outlines of property rights in outer space, which are essentially based on the non-appropriation principle on the one hand, and the obligation of perpetual supervision, jurisdiction, control, and at its essence, responsibility—regarding “space objects” on the other hand, the Artemis Accords has now started to shake things up to such an extent that it seems inevitable that outer space law must change and develop. The focus of this chapter will be on Sections 10 and 11 of the Accords, dealing with space resources, and safety zones—and the (possible) conflict that it may or may not bring with Articles I and II of the Outer Space Treaty, set against the background of (private) property law as opposed to public international law on which the current regime is based. The argument made in this chapter is that while it is possible to interpret the non-appropriation clause of Art II OST in such a way as to be an impediment to the use of Section 10 of the Accords, it is inevitable that the technological developments in outer space activities and operations will result in extraction and utilization of space resources as envisaged by the Accords. Some suggestions on how to prevent overreach in terms of property law will follow.