[arin-ppml] RIPE enforcing court-ordered "right to register"

Mike Burns mike at iptrading.com
Mon Oct 5 11:36:21 EDT 2020


Hi Fernando,

 

Thanks for your thoughts, but there is no needs test in RIPE of course.

And in fact, some entity did come to RIPE with a valid court order that said
"Register is because I paid for it."

So there were no policy issues in that case.

 

In ARIN, we can suppose the buyer was able to justify, but what happens if
the buyer pays and does not get the addresses?

If the buyer is in Canada, can a Canadian judge order ARIN to register the
blocks to the buyer?

 

And the more important question as to whether ARIN would re-register blocks
back to a seller who doesn't get paid?

That would involve policy questions, I think.

 

Regards,
Mike

 

 

 

 

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Fernando Frediani
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2020 10:55 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] RIPE enforcing court-ordered "right to register"

 

I am not sure exactly about RIPE but any court must take in consideration
that the RIR policies must apply for the "buyer" to have the right to
register it. Since in most RIRs the golden rule is (and must keep being) be
able to justify for the addresses being received (either via a donation or a
purchase).

Nobody should ever be able to come to the RIR and say: "Register it because
I paid for". The community who is the one that matters and make the rules is
interested the addresses being transferred are going be really used for its
final propose and get people connected to the internet, therefore it has a
justification and not less important to be fair with all others.
Just having the right to register addresses because it paid for it doesn't
make sense and should be opposed as much as possible by all RIRs.

Thankfully RIPE seems to go in that direction when they say in the
statement: "Finally, it's worth noting that each order will be reviewed on a
case by case basis. If we believe that an order or the third party seeking
to enforce the order does not comply with RIPE policies or RIPE NCC
procedures, we reserve the right to dispute any transfer."

My understanding is that ARIN should only obey orders from a court in the
country it is registered, as other RIRs and other organizations.

Fernando

On 05/10/2020 11:38, Mike Burns wrote:

Hello List,

 

https://labs.ripe.net/Members/ciaran_byrne/seizure-of-the-right-to-registrat
ion-of-ipv4-addresses

 

RIPE has enforced a court order regarding an IPv4 transfer where a buyer who
had paid for the addresses and complied with RIPE policies sought court
protection of his right to register those addresses.

Note that this is not an ownership right but still a right that can be
court-enforced, in Europe at least.

It has always been my understanding that ARIN would enforce a court order
that it deemed legally sound.

 

I like the idea that a buyer's rights can be protected in a court action and
that ARIN would abide by any court order demanding registration.

My question is whether ARIN would accept a valid court order from any
country in the ARIN region, in the manner in which the German court's order
was enforced in the Netherlands, where RIPE is registered.

(Assuming the hypothetical is a buyer with a valid contract specifying a
transfer according to ARIN policy, and that the buyer received a valid court
order from their jurisdiction requiring registration.)

 

And what if the seller did not get paid after a transfer, and a court order
was issued to return the registration rights to the seller, would ARIN be
able to effect that return to the seller given policy requiring a
demonstration of need, and despite the seller having participated in
transfers within the prior year?

 

Can we simply assume that the legal structures within which ARIN operates
supersede any ARIN policy restrictions?

 

Not sure if this is better on arin-discuss list, so I will post there as
well.

In IPv4 transfers, escrow is normally used, but if simple court-protections
are a viable recourse to settle disputes, it may be that escrow services are
less a requirement for a safe transfer.

 

Regards,
Mike Burns

IPTrading.com

 

 





_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net
<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net> ).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>  if you experience any
issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20201005/21caad24/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list