[arin-ppml] Deceased Companies?

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Mon Jul 25 15:32:02 EDT 2022

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 12:19 PM John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> > On 25 Jul 2022, at 3:12 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 11:18 AM Paul E McNary <pmcnary at cameron.net> wrote:
> >> Then why the threat?
> > In my opinion? ARIN has a legal house of cards built on the premise
> > that there are no property rights in IP addresses. It's "true" until a
> > court says otherwise so they want to give the court as few reasons as
> > possible to say otherwise. Like any legal threat, the idea is to keep
> > the matter out of court be gaining compliance.
> A very amusing Interesting assertion – particular given ARIN’s track record of success in court.

Hi John,

I've tracked them over the years. In each case, one of two things has happened:

1. The litigants consent to contracting with ARIN prior to a judge
ruling on any question of property rights. (e.g. Nortel/Microsoft
where the judge implicitly agreed that Nortel owned the addresses
before ARIN intervened and never actually ruled otherwise since
Microsoft's deal with ARIN settled the matter)

2. The judge determines that the litigant is not the entity which
originally registered the addresses.

If you believe there is a court case where ARIN has reclaimed
addresses without either of those things happening, I'll take an
example of that. Really, I'll take any examples that help make the
discussion concrete instead of theoretical.

Bill Herrin

For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list