Space will play a critical role in mitigating challenges ranging from climate, and defence, to supply chains. The development of ‘space for earth’ and ‘space for space’ technologies that deal with resource utilisation from the Moon and other celestial bodies has triggered multi-billion-dollar investments both from the public and private sectors. Articles I and II of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST) read that “the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries” and it is “not subject to national appropriation.” However, these principles are at loggerheads due to the rapid development of space-mining activities. Several space-faring states have introduced national regulations legitimising commercial appropriation of space resources. While the delegation of appropriation rights to commercial/private actors triggers a larger debate around property rights, i.e., can a nation grant a right of appropriation over global commons? Commercial actors argue that international space law does not prohibit extraction explicitly, and space resources are not outer space, the Moon, and other celestial bodies per se. In this context, it is critical to review whether international space law, which entrenches space as a ‘province’ and ‘common heritage’ of humankind, provides a mechanism to ensure equitable distribution of benefits accruing from space resources. This chapter locates outer space as an inaccessible domain for the third world and critically reviews how the concentration of technologies amongst a few hegemonic actors makes the ‘global commons’ inequitable and inaccessible. The chapter draws upon the Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) literature to test whether the principle of common heritage survives in the current era of commercial space mining.