[ppml] Posting of Legacy RSA and FAQ
aaron.dewell at woods.net
Sun Oct 14 03:07:20 EDT 2007
My interpretation of this is that you are not really looking for
increased _fairness_ from ARIN, as by applying roughly the same (lack
of) rights to all, they pretty much fufill the definition of fair. Your
dispute is that you want more protection of your blocks, property,
rights, whatever. That's a separate issue than "fairness".
I believe the ARIN viewpoint is that these blocks are owned by them,
retained by them, however, they allow you certain rights to use them.
Those rights are fully revokeable at any time by ARIN, pretty much
whenever they want to, as these resources are owned by them at all
times. So by this view, it is in ARIN's sole discretion to allow you or
not to allow you to use them.
Now, you might dispute that viewpoint, and claim that these are
assignable property/rights that should not be revoked except for more
dramatic cause than what the current RSA allows. My point is that the
issue is not "fairness", your issue is with what level of rights are
associated with a registration (regardless of type).
IMHO, the level of rights associated with registrations is pretty much
set at this point, and while ARIN has the right to revoke any
registration at pretty much any time, they have not done so arbitrarily
to my knowledge. So trying to petition Congress to change the
organization is rolling the dice as to whether the new organization
would be as "fair" or would be more arbitrary.
On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 02:31 -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
> Having reviewed the Legacy RSA, I can say that it removes a number of
> significant rights from Legacies. With the exception of fees, it is
> about as onerous and encumbered as the regular RSA.
> Embedded in the document is again the threat of denial of services. The
> agreement states that by signing agreement, ARIN will
> Legacies get a fee of $100/yr through 2013. After 2013, the fees can
> go up.
> Section 3. A great deal of the agreement is at ARIN's sole discretion.
> It looks like a Legacy that signs this agreement can lose their block if
> ARIN "Determines in its sole discretion that it cannot provide
> Section 4. Under the new agreement, if one doesn't 'cooperate' with
> ARIN, again in its sole discretion, may take back the block. Wow.
> ARIN can take back a block if the applicant is ever found to violate
> 'any applicable laws, statutes or regulations by a ruling...'. Guess
> McDonalds won't be able to keep their block. They violate health
> regulations somewhere every day.
> ARIN can take back a block if the applicant _assists_ anyone doing
> something prohibited by this document. I guess that means ISC loses its
> blocks, because it assists SORBS and Alan Brown, who has been found in a
> court to violate the law for defamation. Oh wait, those aren't legacy
> Applicant is responsible for timely management and accurate maintenance
> of whois data and SWIP data. So if your whois or SWIP gets out of date,
> you are in violation of the agreement; you lose your block. Wow.
> Section 8. ARIN may review your allocation once per year. If you don't
> comply with the allocation policy, ARIN can back your block.
> Section 12. Bankruptcy is another provision. If a legacy declares
> bankruptcy under any chapter (even debt reorganization!), then ARIN can
> take back the block. I can see taking back a block when a chapter 7
> bankruptcy or other chapter leading to termination of business would
> justify taking back a block. However, there is no reason why chapter 11
> (debt reorganization), which doesn't lead to business termination and in
> fact prevents creditors from halting operations, should be justification
> for ARIN taking back blocks. This is a flaw in the NPRM, too.
> What's worse, if SOMEONE ELSE files a bankruptcy petition against you,
> ARIN can take back the block. Wow. Guess there will be a lot of
> frivolous bankruptcy petitions against people they don't like. This is
> also in the RSA, but I hadn't noticed it before.
> Section 14. Term and Termination. ARIN can terminate immediately with
> cause (violations above), or at each year. Its a very lopsided
> Section 15. The only right the legacy keeps is the right to transfer.
> Well, not exactly. One now needs ARIN's written permission. There's also
> an anti-Kremen v ARIN, Kremen v. Cohen clause to say that blocks cannot
> be re-assigned involuntarilly by a Court. Wow.
> One of the serious flaws is that one must agree to resolve disputes
> through arbitration. Arbitration is a fine way to cheaply resolve small
> disputes, where all that is needed a reasonable third person to resolve
> trivial disputes. However, there is no appeal from arbitration. If one
> goes to Court, and the judge makes a mistake, that mistake can be
> corrected. But if an arbitrator makes a mistake, there is no way to
> correct that. An arbitrator also may not have any sophisticated
> understanding of the law. They are often lawyers, but need not be
> lawyers. Even where they are lawyers, they may not be experts in the
> legal issues relevant to your case. So, for any complicated case, where
> there is more possibility of mistake, there is no possibility that
> mistake can be corrected. This makes arbitration a very bad choice for
> anything of importance, where proper adherence to the law is important.
> So, I think it is a bad idea to agree to arbitration on any significant
> issue. Certainly, Legacies have not previously agreed to arbitration,
> nor anything else in this Legacy RSA.
> What a horribly unfair and lopsided agreement. The regular RSA is a real
> doozy, too, I just noticed. Time to write those letters to Congress. We
> definitely need a new, FAIR registrar.
> I think we can now say without doubt that this Legacy RSA removes rights
> from Legacies who sign it and transfers those rights to ARIN. And as a
> result, there is an even stronger argument that ARIN, by creating a fear
> of denial of services in the minds of Legacies, and then obtaining
> contract and property rights from Legacies, has engaged in extortion and
> racketeering as explained in my previous message (repeated below)
> It also remains unclear at what Board Meeting this was discussed. It
> remains unclear what NRPM change allows it to be accepted. It remains
> unclear why community input on the document wasn't solicited before it
> was released.
> It is however clear what benefits ARIN obtains from Legacies.
> >From my previous message (Friday):
> It occurs to me that the release of the Legacy RSA just announced
> violates the process of ARIN to solicit input from the membership before
> adopting a new license. The ARIN community should discuss the license
> and decide the terms just like any other significant change in ARIN.
> ARIN can't just drop a new licence without any discussion.
> It also occurs to me that Legacy RSA, if it removes _any_ privilege or
> value from Legacy's, is extortion. From Blacks Law dictionary:
> Extortion: The obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful
> use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of
> official right. 18 U.S.C.A section 871 et seq; section 1951
> ARIN, in statements by it lawyer, and supported by Chairman Curran's
> statements, has threatened to deny service to Legacy's under the color
> of official right, creating fear and thereby inducing Legacy's to agree
> to an RSA that (presumably) removes valuable rights from Legacy's.
> There are references to the Hobbs Act (racketeering) if the extortion
> interferes with interstate commerce (it does, since whois and in-addr
> services are used in interstate commerce.)
> Anticipating that people might argue that IP Addresses aren't property,
> I looked up what property is. According to Black's Law Dictionary, in
> criminal law, the term 'property' includes contract rights, and that is
> exactly what the subject is here.
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Member Services wrote:
> > The Legacy Registration Services Agreement (RSA), first referenced in the 11 October 2007 announcement,
> > has been posted to the ARIN website at: http://www.arin.net/registration/agreements/legacy_rsa.pdf.
> > A Frequently Asked Questions document is also available to assist the community at:
> > http://www.arin.net/registration/agreements/legacy_rsa_faq.html
> > An implementation date will be announced in the near future.
> > Regards,
> > Raymond A. Plzak
> > President & CEO
> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy
> > Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services
> > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML