[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-171 Section 8.4 Modifications: ASN and legacy resources

[Astrodog]

On 6/8/2012 10:10 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On 6/8/12, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 8, 2012, at 5:49 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> So... can you cite a specific case in which the addresses were sold
>>> for less money to "other qualified recipients" because ARIN nixed the
>>> one with the higher offer?
>>>
>> What does it matter? If they found alternate buyers at the same or higher
>> price in order to qualify under ARIN policy, I think that's what matters.
> Hi Owen,
>
> What does it matter? Good question. The answer is this: the courts
> have repeatedly treated legacy IP addresses as a salable asset. Not
> property. Salable assets. Belonging to the registrant. Not property.
> Assets. Like any other intangible that belongs to the registrant. His.
> That's now well established legal precedent.
>

I think the question here is actually what happens if ARIN refuses due
to an unqualified recipient. It would be very difficult for a buyer or a
bankruptcy judge to show ARIN is obligated to update its' database in
these circumstances... ARIN does not have an agreement with either party
in these sorts of circumstances. The legacy holder or a judge can
certainly assert that the resources may be delegated/sold/etc... but
that does not necessarily extend to ARIN updating its records to reflect
the transfer. AFAIK, there is no precedent for ARIN being compelled to
update its own registry, due to legal action involving two entirely
unrelated third parties who have no expectation of services from ARIN.

The risks for all parties involved in determining the legal standing
here is significant. The bankruptcy court risks rendering what was a
sale-able asset completely worthless, the potential buyer risks ending
up owning something of little to no value (The resource, without ARIN
updating its' records), and ARIN risks losing any type of control over
the legacy space.

I don't see why anyone involved would want to go "to the mat", so to
speak. It's much easier for the court to find another buyer. Even if a
court were to attempt to order ARIN to update its records, the almost
complete certainty of a lengthy appeals process would significantly
devalue the resources to a buyer attempting to deploy a network.

In my experience outside of the ARIN / IP Addressing world, as it
relates to title... bankruptcy judges, and a company's creditors, want a
fast conclusion. If an asset needs to be devalued due to uncertain
title, it is, and the legal issues are left to the buyer to resolve. A
company's creditors rarely want to drag out liquidation any longer than
they have to. They certainly don't want to wait on a multi-year legal
process with a substantial risk of rendering the asset entirely worthless.

--- Harrison