[arin-ppml] WhoWas Service Now in ARIN Online Announcement

[David Miller]

On 3/28/2012 4:27 PM, admin at directcolocation.com wrote:
> I do agree that it is not a bad thing but I do not see how it is a fair
> approach for a new service being applied to the whois at this date
> forward, if you were in the business of LAW then it would appear that it
> was a law that was being implemented and now would effect you on anything
> you have done in the past vrs now that you know making sure that you
> govern yourself accordingly.
>
> I am not a lawyer but I think they call this ex post facto in the fact you
> cannot punished for something you did in the past.
>
> But in this case you may have well done something in the past and now have
> to live with it for the rest of your IP life. I do not see how this could
> be a fair way to handle the implementation of the information available in
> this service, now that you know it exist and or you had some issues in the
> past, even if you have cleaned up your act.
>
> The problem I see is in this case is that as we all know the anti spammers
> are not held accountable by any law or in some cases we do not know who
> they are and or where they are, so if the  have this information at there
> disposal.
>
> Could it put ARIN a position of some kind of liability from a potential
> law suite for providing this information based on private business models
> and who one chooses to do business with based on the legal side of the
> quote can spam act as all spammers will calm they follow.
>
> The problem could be perceived is that the network operator is being
> punished here by unregulated anti spammer groups and thus harming the
> business income of that operator by the act of ARIN providing access to
> this information to unregulated anti spammer groups, vrs the operators
> business income being harmed because of the actions of ARIN providing the
> unregulated groups access to the info.
>
>
> Again I am not a lawyer, but this should be considered, because anti
> spammers, like spammers hide themselves. With out the ability to regulate
> the anti spammers and hold them accountable for there actions of the use
> or mis use of this service, while there is some legislation in the can
> spam act that has holds the spammers to some accountability.
>
> I would venture to say in our law suite happy world that some sharp lawyer
> might just challenge the use of this service harming an operators business
> income and go after the provider of information that caused the harm in
> this case ARIN.
>
> I guess we should consider if any of the other RIR's are doing the same
> service because that would negate this concern.
>
> I am sure they would try to site that as a difference in single out of
> ARIN if it came down to that extreme situation.
>
>
> Also do you know if the service will be used on IPV6 whois so as this goes
> forward we will be able to have that information there also or is just on
> the IPV4 whois
>
> Donald Mahoney
> Network Engineer
> Direct Colocation

Most of these strike me as "I wouldn't have been speeding if I had known
there was a speed trap on this road." arguments.

IANAL, but you can most certainly be punished under the law for things
that you did in the past.  There are limits for many crimes and civil
cases - called statutes of limitations / periods of prescription.  In
the US there is no statute of limitations for many offenses including
murder and kidnapping.

Ex post facto laws are those that retroactively criminalize actions from
the past.  We don't allow these in the US, but this is not applicable to
this situation.  There is no new law here.

What you are referring to would probably be better compared to the
development of the use of DNA evidence.  I am not aware of rules
limiting the use of new forms of evidence in investigating events that
happened before the form of evidence existed.  It isn't a useful defense
to say that a person would have been more careful at the crime scene if
they had known that DNA collection and matching would be developed and
eventually used as evidence against them.

-DMM

>
> On 3/28/12 3:42 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
> It goes back in time and should include all historical whois information
> available.
>
> The only drawback is it prevents someone from denying their history.
> Personally, I don't see that as a bad thing.
>
> Owen
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Mar 28, 2012, at 1:04 PM, admin at directcolocation.com wrote:
>
> I guess it comes down to the fact of how they the ARIN intends to create
> the starting point on this service since it is a new service, does it go
> back in the historical past from the inception of the blocks that are
> assigned to such or does it go forward from this point of the service
> being created.
> The key for his concern would be if they had problems in the past with the
> anti spammers and continued having the same kind of problem customers,
> then I could see the use of this service potential effecting the long term
> reputation, since the problem would be that some of the anti spammer
> groups that might use the service could refuse to work with this kind of
> operator so they could at least clean up there act.
> Does anyone know if ARIN intends to start the service from this point
> forward and or go back into current historical data from the issuance of
> the blocks in the whois.
> If they start it from this point on then I would look at it as an
> opportunity to get my house in order if you know that this is the kind of
> customers you have been targeting.
> Donald Mahoney
> Network Engineer
> Direct Colocation
> On 3/28/12 2:31 PM, "Kevin Kargel" <kkargel at polartel.com> wrote:
> It appears that after years of being harangued by 'anti-spam' cultists for
> access to historic WHOIS data in order to burnish their credentials as
> Official Spam Detectives and support their efforts to criminalize
> marketing and drag email back to the DARPA era, ARIN has finally thrown in
> the towel. I am frankly disappointed.
> Has this topic every been discussed? This needs not to be part of the
> Disciples of ARIN. I am optimistic this can be reversed pending
> discussion.
> Nicky Smith
> CAROLINANET.COM
> 336.346.6000 x105
> I, for one, do not understand what you perceive the evil of a WhoWas service
> to be? Aside from the worst case of wasting admin time and budget I do not
> see a real down side to it's existence. Please elucidate.
> I do remember the topic being discussed on more than one occasion.
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.