[ppml] IP address theft?
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Mon Apr 28 14:01:20 EDT 2003
I agree with the spirit of the term 'theft' in your message regard WIANA
below, but I am not sure about the literal definition.
It is not property in a tangible sense. It is not owned, but there is a
significant infrastructure of 'stewardship' which makes the infrastructure
reliable and predictable.
Its unsanctioned use is a violation of the protocol in use, but is it theft
in the eyes of the law?
If addresses allocated to ARIN are squatted, does ARIN's incorporation or
the allocation process give it 'rights' under the law to exclusive dominion
on these 'things'?
Do you use the term literally or figuratively?
> On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 01:41 AM, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
> >> They are trying to steal 1/8. Why should anyone condone
> such action?
> > They are trying to use it, not steal it.
> Which is what a car jacker might say.
> They have unilaterally asserted the use of 188.8.131.52/8, which according
> to the _only_ authority used to date (the IANA) has been
> reserved since
> 1981. By this unilateral assertion, they are attempting to
> remove that
> address space from the pool of unallocated addresses without
> existing, published address allocation policies.
> This is theft.
> > The RIRs no longer need to conserve IPv4 address space.
> This isn't about conserving address space or whether or not they are
> using address space for a valid reason. The Internet works because
> most people see it is in their self-interest to cooperate. Part of
> this cooperation is to agree to use the Internet registry system
> including the IANA as a meeting point to define global
> The folks at WIANA have chosen to ignore this cooperative system for,
> as far as I can tell, no good reason. Perhaps you have different
More information about the ARIN-PPML