[ARIN-consult] [arin-announce] Reminder: Consultation onRegistration ServicesAgreement - MORE

[John Curran]

On Aug 18, 2015, at 7:54 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com<mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:

Hi John,

You are either wrong, or not understanding what I wrote earlier and what I wrote in this thread to Owen.

When Nortel put those blocks up for sale, none of them had ever been registered to Nortel in Whois.
Therefore there were the same kind of inaccurate Whois registrations then as we have now will shell corporate transfers, as a result of Nortel never coming to ARIN to do an 8.2 transfer when they acquired those companies years before.

After the judge approved the sale and during the 30 day period before it was finalized, ARIN must have processed ex-post facto 8.2 transfers to bring those netblocks under Nortel's name, where they were then processed in an 8.3 transfer to Microsoft. Under policy, cough.

Mike -

    They were not “ex-post facto” 8.2 transfers, as no transfer to any other party
    had yet occurred.   If you believe that the court approved the sale after the
    auction, please cite a copy of the court order which states such.  There _was_
    a proposed sale document and draft court order, which ARIN received and
    then intervened, but that order was not approved by the court.  The court did
    ultimately approve a sale document and order, but those documents were
    both the result of discussions between ARIN, Microsoft, and Nortel, as noted
    in NNI Docket, document #5280 -
    “10. Second, the revisions reflected in the Amended Sale Agreement and Revised Order
     were the result of  negotiations between Microsoft, ARIN and NNI and, accordingly,
     ARIN’s counsel has informed NNI that it does not oppose entry of the Revised Order. “

I will keep making the assertion that the Nortel blocks were not registered to Nortel in the many years between their acquisitions of the companies to whom these blocks were registered, and the late 2010 auction, which which I was involved.  I still have the documentation going along with the original auction, do you want to see these to confirm what I say?

   The fact that they were not updated until the actual third-party transfer is not
   contested, and in fact, is quite common even today in 8.3 and 8.4 transfers.

   The point is that an M&A transfers and the application of 8.2 policy occurs as
   part of the overall process, and prior to the completion of the transfer of rights
   to a third-party via an 8.3 transfer.

You keep saying I am making false statements, tell me again what I wrote, at any time, was not accurate.

   See above - the characterization of “ex-post facto” would only be applicable if the
   transfer to a third-party occurred prior to ARIN’s approval; note that the auction
   result specifically is not a sale, but results in a transaction which is then brought
   to the court for approval.

 The Nortel blocks were not registered to Nortel when they went up for sale. Period.

   Correct.  However, your statement to the effect that the the relevant 8.2 transfers did
   not happen "except ex-post facto" was inorrect, since the court did not approve the sale
   as it was proposed.   The 8.3 transfer did not occur until ARIN finished the review, and
   a set of updated documents were submitted and approved by the court as noted above.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20150818/4ffc4019/attachment.html>