[arin-ppml] Of interest?

[Jimmy Hess]

On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:28 PM William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>
Ay, very interesting.

I think by "precedent"  they must mean --  the publication of this result in
the news should help deter other bad actors from trying the same shenanigans.
The result of an arbitration does not set "legal precedent" in the
sense regarding
a matter of law -- that only comes from a question going to an
appellate or other high court.

Fraud is illegal without any precedent being needed though.   And
whether someone is
forging sworn papers to qualify for a loan,  or sworn papers to
qualify for IP addresses,
or something else...   the fraudulent misrepresentation or entering a
contract in bad faith
can lead to  resulting contract becoming void.

I read the situation as involving some claimant attempting to pursue
protective orders
from a judge against ARIN to prohibit ARIN revoking allocations made and
later invoking an arbitration right provided for ARIN Subscribers in
the RSA against ARIN
in order to try to use dispute resolution to stop ARIN from taking
negative actions for fraud.

Then the matter comes to actual arbitration but ultimately the
claimant failed to make
any kind of argument,  and finally allowed a motion to go forward from
ARIN unopposed
that effectively closed the matter and gave ARIN their legal fees,
plus return of IP addresses.

On the other hand: it sounds as if the fraudsters got off with no
other real penalty.

"Some of the resources sought and fraudulently obtained had been
transferred to bona-fide purchasers out of the ARIN region."

Kind of makes you wonder...   Could the profits from "Bona-fide
purchasers outside
of ARIN region" by the fraudsters  have exceeded what they were ordered to pay?


> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 8:10 AM Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> > I found this to be an interesting article and perhaps others on the list would appreciate knowing about it.
> > https://www.news-journal.com/ap/national/arin-wins-important-legal-case-and-precedent-against-fraud/article_ceb57140-e574-5355-a8b3-c8f8c70a439e.html
> This is indeed interesting and good news. One thing about the article confuses me: what precedent was set here? That ARIN can enforce a signed, written contract as normal under the law? Was that ever in doubt?
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
--
-JH