[arin-ppml] ARIN releases new version of the Legacy Registration

[John Santos]

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Howard, W. Lee wrote:

> > > 3. 4(d)(ii) Legacy holder "violate(s) any applicable laws, 
> > statutes or 
> > > regulations, as established by a definitive ruling of a court or 
> > > government agency;"
> > 
> > This is the only clause that I have any problems with, at 
> > least so far.
> > 
> > Maybe the word "applicable" covers this, though IANAL, so I worry!
> 
> Would you check with a lawyer, or discuss your concerns with 
> ARIN's General Counsel?  IANAL either, so I'm reluctant to
> interpret this section too closely.
> 
> I will make the point that ARIN has to comply with laws, 
> government regulations, and court orders.
> 
> > Third is I don't think ARIN should become an instrument of 
> > state suppression of freedom of speach, press, or association.
> 
> While I am suspicious of government persecution, I also think
> it would be inappropriate for ARIN staff or Board to decide to 
> ignore a court order or break a law to defend a principle.  

Which I explicitly *said* in a paragraph you cut.

> We're not competent to evaluate, on behalf of the members and
> community, whether a principle should supersede the law (at 
> least, we're not more competent than the judicial system; let's
> not be in contempt of the courts).  ARIN is not the right
> organization to resist a government gone amok--that's waaay
> outside our mission.

It shouldn't be abetting it either, which is my point.  And
remember, there is more than one government involved.  
> 
> > Perhaps "applicable" covers all these areas, or maybe there 
> > implicitly has to be a court order, with due process, all 
> > possibility of appeals exhausted, etc.
> 
> "definitive" and "applicable" are useful adjectives.
> 
> > > 4. 4(d)(iii) Legacy holder "assist(s) any third party in 
> > engaging in 
> > > any activity prohibited by this Legacy Agreement."
> > 
> > Assuming all protections that apply to the previous section 
> > also apply here, this would be okay.  Otherwise it is the 
> > possibility of an end-run around 4(d)(ii).
> 
> The trick is to prevent the end run around 4(d)(ii) (or other
> naughtiness) by having a third party do your dirty work.
> 

Yes, and that cuts both ways.



> Lee
> 
> 

-- 
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539