[arin-ppml] Borders sells their /16 block

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Wed Dec 7 10:31:22 EST 2011

On Dec 7, 2011, at 11:10 AM, Mike Burns wrote:
> My argument is that ARIN has no contract with legacy address rights holders which gives it the right to apply its policies. Remember these addresses were doled out before ARIN even existed.

That's correct, but doesn't also reflect the fact that the assignments in the
region were made under a long line of US Government contracts (including IANA 
and InterNIC), the responsibility for which was transferred to ARIN specifically 
to give the users of IP numbers in the region a voice in the policies by which 
they are managed and allocated.[*] 

[*] <http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=102819>

> ARIN controls the Whois database, and can do what they wish with the data therein, but when attempting to negate the uniqueness of addresses, we tread on dangerous ground, and not just the danger that ARIN will be liable for tortious interference in the sales contract between the address rights holder and the buyer.

An amusing theory. Also worth considering is that someone trying to sell
integers, who knows in advance that any uniqueness is the result of the
registry which they don't plan on complying with, may easily be seen as
engaging in fraud (particularly if they don't make the purchaser well 
aware of this little detail at the time of the transaction.)  In most 
states, there are very clear laws about this sort of behavior, although
they were passed due to the creative 'sale' of bridges and swampland.


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list