[arin-ppml] Nanog IPV4 Panel Discussion and 8.3 transfers
jcurran at arin.net
Fri Feb 10 14:02:16 EST 2012
On Feb 10, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Andrew Dul wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 10:04 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> Perhaps you can share the reasoning you have that causes you to
>> believe that the courts would desire to enforce a contract between A
>> and B on party C's property.
> Contract #1:
> Legacy holder A sells zzz.yyy.0.0/16 to Party B for $1,000,000,
> agreed on 3/1/2012
> ARIN registers zzz.yyy.0.0/20 to B on 4/1/2012 since B can only justify
> a /20
> Since A still has rights to the rest of the /16 it decides to sell
> another block to C
> Contract #2:
> Legacy holder A sells zzz.yyy.128.0/17 to Party C for $2,000,000
> agreed on 1/1/2013
> ARIN registers zzz.yyy.128.0/17 to Party C on 2/1/2013
> Party B sues Party A & C, ARIN etc... for breach of contract since it
> purchased the rights to zzz.yyy.0.0/16 on 3/1/2012
> The courts decide who wins and who loses...
See my follow-on message on this regarding contract
language... If Party A's contract #1 is appropriately
written, then Party B only received the /20 (hopefully
only paid for the same) when the contract became final.
If Party A indicated otherwise to Party B and then
proceeded as outlined, then indeed a court will sort
the matter out without any difficulty at all. Write
two contracts to sell the same automobile and you'll
see the same outcome.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML