[arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses

[Robert Bonomi]

> From arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net  Mon Sep 29 14:25:57 2008
> Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:25:20 +0100
> From: <michael.dillon at bt.com>
> To: <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses
>
[[..  sneck  ..]

> Given that the RIR policies and registration agreements(contracts)
> all state clearly that IP addresses are not property, I don't
> see how you can buy or sell the right to use them other than 
> through a derivative contract. 

It is really quite simple.  

What is granted in a block assignment from a RIR  (or the original DARPA 
address-coordinatior) is not 'ownership' of the addresses, but just a 
"right to use" license for those integers in a particular context.

The *license* is, itself, "property", and  can bought and sold. 

This is, functionally, no different from the title to a condominium, or a 
deeded 'skybox' at the sports emporium of ones choice.

It is a straight purchase/sale of an asset.

It is, arguably a 'derivative object', because it's existance is derived
from another thing.

It is not a "derivative instrument", because those things are a 'contract
to enter into a contract'.

>                                So far, I have seen no policy
> proposals to change IP addresses into property, and if they
> are not property, then they cannot be an asset and cannot be
> bought or sold.

FALSE TO FACT.

The right-to-use license _is_ an asset and -- like *any*other* asset -- can
be bought or sold, subject to the restrictions on the title thereunto imposed 
by the original license issuer.

The current proposal is simply a change of terms of the previously-granted
licenses, from "non-transferrable" to "transferrable, under specified 
conditions".