[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

[Owen DeLong]

On Mar 16, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> Thus spake "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at ipinc.net>
>>> Nothing is simple when lawyers get involved, and this sort of
>>> contract is novel in a variety of ways, so until it's been tested in
>>> court, we really don't know how enforceable it is.
>>
>> OK so according to this logic since no contract is really valid until
>> it's tested in a court, there is no point for businesses to bother to
>> sign contracts with each other because none of those contracts
>> have been tested in court and so are bogus anyway.
>
> Ah, good ol' reductio ad absurdum...
>
> New contracts are generally based on prior contracts and case law  
> so one has a basis to determine how courts will view them.  While  
> I'm sure ARIN's counsel has done their best with the RSA, it is  
> unique enough we're really not sure what the courts will think of  
> it.  ARIN is still in court over their first lawsuit (well, I  
> haven't seen any discussion of a conclusion to the case yet)  
> regarding the RSA, so we don't really know what its status is. The  
> result could be anything from 100% enforceability to anti-trust or  
> restraint-of-trade actions against ARIN.
>
The first case in question won't settle the issue of the RSA  
enforceability,
since he's suing to try and avoid actually signing the RSA.  I believe
from what I observed at the last hearing I attended that the judge is  
going
to rule (if he hasn't already) almost completely in favor of ARIN.   
He made
it very clear that it was not his intent to allow the person to  
circumvent
the normal registration process.


Owen