[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 108: Eliminate the term license in the NRPM
bill at herrin.us
Tue Feb 16 10:23:49 EST 2010
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Joe Maimon <jmaimon at chl.com> wrote:
> Asserting property rights on protocol numbers is mutually exclusive with
> consensus based self regulation and development
Possibly. One could argue that "common law" is a form of
consensus-based self-regulation. Or taking into account your implied
point distinguishing government and NGOs, one could point out that
homeowners' associations work as well or better than condominiums even
though the individual homes are owned by individual owners instead of
the stakeholders collectively owning the condominium and merely
controlling their personal part of it.
> as it requires trampling
> over the private property rights of others.
I'll have to ask you to expand on and justify that claim; it doesn't
follow from the evidence I'm aware of.
> A service without property rights is the only thing ARIN or any other
> protocol number Registrar has ever provided.
That's debatable for InterNIC on back. The arguments are stale so I
won't repeat them but it is by no means a settled question.
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the ARIN-PPML