[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-170 Transfer of Number Resources in case Bankruptcy

[Astrodog]

[snip]
> It appears as through folks are working under very different assumptions
> with respect to ARIN and bankruptcy courts.  To date, ARIN has been very
> successful in dealing with number resources in bankruptcy, and this is the
> result of having a very consistent legal framework which has been respected 
> by the courts dealing with these matters.  Specifically, ARIN asserts that
> parties do have certain rights to number resources registered to them, and
> this includes the right to unique use in the registry and the right to 
> transfer in accordance with policy.  There are other parties (such as the
> Internet community) which have rights to these same number resources (such 
> as the right to public visibility to certain portions of the registration, 
> the right to require certain contact information be present, etc.)  It is 
> the community-developed policy which determines the interaction of these
> rights.
>
> ARIN has dealt with bankruptcy courts before, and has prevailed to date in 
> every case.  To date, multiple IPv4 resources have been transferred in 
> compliance with existing policy, and include the following proceedings 
> and block sizes:
>
>     In Nortel (Nortel I – USA) (Delaware)   04/26/2011 9 /16’s; 1 /17; 1 /18; 4 /20’s; 2 /21’s; 1 /22; 4 /23’s; and 16 /24’s
>     In re: Borders Group, Inc., et al., (S.D.NY) 12/20/2011 1 /16
>     In re: Teknowledge Corporation (N.D.CA) 1/24/2012 1 /16
>     In Northern Telecom Canada, Ltd. (Nortel II – Canada)  2/24/2012 2/16’s
>     In Bell-Northern Research (Nortel II – Canada) 2/29/2012 1 /14,  2/29/2012 1 /14, 4/10/2012 2 /16’s
>
> In each of these matters, there is language noting ARIN's role in providing
> registration services, and in recent ones the language is generally to the
> effect that the recipient's interest in the number resources shall be subject 
> to the terms and conditions agreed to by ARIN and recipient via registration
> services agreement, including applicable ARIN policies as published on our
> website.
>
> By having a consistent approach to these matters, one which acknowledges
> and respects certain rights that address holders have, we have been very
> successful and have never been ordered to update the registry contrary to
> community-developed policy.
>
I'm curious, in the case of the transfers outlined above, can you
describe what needs testing was performed and if any of these transfers
involved continuing to operate the acquired entity's network?

This information makes me believe that we may have a solution searching
for a problem, with both the original prop-170, and the "safe harbor"
concept.

--- Harrison