[ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

[Stephen Sprunk]

Thus spake "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com>
>> "MR. RYAN: I've thought a little bit about what a stick might look
>> like here. So for example, it's very clear to me that denial of
>> service by ARIN is legally permitted. In other words, I don't
>> believe we, as the non-profit trying to carry out the community's
>> wishes, have a duty to provide free services for legacy address
>> holders. And the denial of those free services to legacy address
>> holders pursuant to their lack of agreement is perfectly permitted,
>> in my judgment, as a matter of law."
>
> if arin does not want to carry out its commitment to the community
> and to the USG when it was chartered [0], i am sure the
> community can find an organization more interested in public
> service.  probably such a change would be good for the
> community; at least this puff and bluff would cease.

In my message that Dean responded to, please note the relevant part:

"it doesn't appear that ARIN has any legal obligation to maintain registry 
services for legacy assignments, though it does have a moral one since that 
was a condition of ARIN's creation."

I believe we are _morally_ obligated, regardless of our (lack of) legal 
obligation, to continue to provide registry services for legacy assignments 
that are still in use.  If a legacy assignment is not still in use (e.g. 
because the holder forgot about it, went bankrupt, etc.), I see no moral or 
legal obligation to continue providing services and we should reclaim it.  I 
think this position is clear from 2007-14.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking