[arin-ppml] On USG 'granting of rights' (was: ARIN-PPML 2015-2)

[Mike Burns]

.

> Indeed ARIN appears to have sought every other avenue in which each 
> case could be concluded without a judge having to reach the property question.

That is also incorrect.

Thanks!
/John


Well, I remember the Microsoft/Nortel sale of all-legacy addresses allocated to defunct entities being sold in a bankruptcy court with no mention of ARIN.
In a court where the judge found that Nortel had the exclusive right to transfer the addresses before bidding began.
And I remember ARIN engaging in secret negotiations with Microsoft in the 30 days it had before the judge finalized his order, and allowing it to sign a modified Legacy Services Agreement when policy required an RSA.
And I remember ARIN scurrying in that 30 days to find that Microsoft apparently had a justified need for precisely the number of ip addresses allocated to a motley crew of companies acquired by Nortel in the 1990s.
And language about requirements designed with aggregation in mind, which required a single block transfer, were ignored.

Instead of letting the judge finalize his order as it was written.

To me that is evidence of what Bill is saying.

Regards,
Mike