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

[Owen DeLong]

For the most part, the only time anyone signs ANY RSA is with they are getting additional resources.

So, in essence, the entire RSA is to sme extent about further ARIN services.

If you want more resources from this community, then you should agree that the resources managed under this community
framework, then I think it is perfectly reasonable for the community to demand that you acknowledge the relationship not
only for the resources you are about to receive, but for the resources you already happen to hold, regardless of how acquired,
as well.

Owen

> On Aug 17, 2015, at 14:16 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Owen,
>  
> Section 7 is not about future justifications or “further ARIN services”. 
> It is strictly about renouncing property rights and should refer to the rights to the Included Resources, which is what the agreement covers.
>  
> Why must the holder sign away all property rights to all resources now and in the future?
> What does that have to do with further ARIN services?
>  
> The rest of the document is very clear on the services issue.
>  
> Regards,
> Mike
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] 
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:59 PM
> To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
> Cc: John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>; arin-consult at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] [arin-announce] Reminder: Consultation on Registration ServicesAgreement - MORE
>  
> I oppose Mike’s proposed modifications.
>  
> I think it is perfectly reasonable to use the desire for further ARIN services as a point for making it clear that
> the existing resources are also part of that process.
>  
> If you consider yourself reasonable and wish to disagree, then you are reasonably able to do without more
> resources from this community.
>  
> Owen
>  
>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 13:55 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:
>>  
>> Hi John,
>>  
>> I suggest changing the language in the proposed RSA section 7.
>> Delete sections (b) and (c) and rename section (d) as section (b).
>> Change “accordance with Policy” to “accordance with the Policies” to match the language of other sections.
>>  
>> Section 7 would then read:
>>  
>> Holder acknowledges and agrees that: (a) the Included Number Resources are not property (real, personal,
>> or intellectual) of Holder; and (b) Holder will transfer or receive Included Number Resources in accordance with the Policies.
>>  
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at arin.net <mailto:jcurran at arin.net>] 
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:37 PM
>> To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>>
>> Cc: arin-consult at arin.net <mailto:arin-consult at arin.net>
>> Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] [arin-announce] Reminder: Consultation on Registration ServicesAgreement - MORE
>>  
>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com <mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:
>>>>    As noted, the proposed agreement includes changes to more specifically qualify two of 
>>>>    the four statements in section 7 to apply to the particular resources (“Included number
>>>>    resources”)
>>>>  
>>>>    From your message, I would surmise that these changes to 7(a) and 7(d), in and of 
>>>>    themselves, are not sufficient in your view to address the issue?
>>>> …
>>>  
>>> The result of the changes is a Trojan Horse for any legacy holder, IMO.
>>> The RSA comes in as if it were covering only specific access, and only upon deeper inspection does the signer realize he has given up all property rights, now and in the future, of all resources.
>>> I ask again, what is the legal purpose for the generality of those clauses (7b and 7c) in the context of an agreement covering a specific an defined set of number resources?
>>> And by context, I mean immediate literal context, where these clauses are bracketed by similar clauses which are not so general?
>>  
>> Mike - 
>>  
>> The language in section 7 reflects ARIN’s existing RSA and LRSA agreements; the purpose
>> of the consultation is to gather feedback on a set of changes which have been suggested by
>> the community in the past and which ARIN is considering moving forward with.
>>  
>> If you support ARIN moving to the new agreements (or not), it would helpful to make your
>> views known.  If there are additional changes that you feel are necessary, please provide
>> some suggested language for those changes.
>>  
>> Thanks!
>> /John
>>  
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> ARIN
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Consult
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing
>> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net>).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult> Please contact the ARIN Member Services
>> Help Desk at info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20150817/22365a7c/attachment.html>