[arin-ppml] Nanog IPV4 Panel Discussion and 8.3 transfers

[John Curran]

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.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN