[arin-ppml] Deceased Companies?

Ronald F. Guilmette rfg at tristatelogic.com
Wed Jul 27 04:58:07 EDT 2022


In message <4B84B1B4-8559-4B48-AD1D-44C403742768 at arin.net>, 
John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

>Deceased entities generally don't pay their renewal invoices. which then results
>in revocation of the associated number resources?  (and no need to track them) 
>
>Your stream of hypothetical situations has predominantly been regarding deceased
>entities that somehow have still manage to have their ARIN invoices paid on an 
>ongoing basis - not likely to be a very common occurrence with truly defunct
>entities. 

Perhaps that is true, John. only because ARIN's definition of "truly defunct entities"
is just one whole hell of a lot more informal and relaxed than is the actual law and
the actual legal view on these things in most or all of these United States.

I am reminded of a famous line from the movie "The Princess Bride" (1987):

      "He's only MOSTLY dead."
                      -- Miracle Max (Billy Crystal)

Anyway, since you have challenged my hypothetical as being implausible, you now
oblige me to move from the general and the hypothetical to the specific and the
concrete.  I didn't want to do that, but given that you are now challenging my
hypothetical as being implausible you leave me no choice, even though I'm sure
you'll inform me that just by being specific I am violating some obscure mailing
list Code of Conduct provision, even though all the relevant facts are already a
matter of public record, including even in the press.

I call your attention, John, to the following blog article dated October 22, 2020,
i.e. well more than a year and a half ago:

    https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/10/the-now-defunct-firms-behind-8chan-qanon/

Please take note of the following relevant points:

    *  Two specific companies are called out in this blog article as being
       dissolved and defunct with respect to their incorporations within their
       respective home states -- Nevada for the first one and California for
       the second one.

    *  The first of these two companies (the Nevada one) has since rectified the
       deficiencies it had in October of 2020 with regards to its Nevada State
       corporate registration, and thus is no longer of concern.

    *  The second of these two companies (the California one) has NOT rectified the
       deficiencies it had in October of 2020 with regards to its California State
       corporate registration.

    *  The blog article from October, 2020 includes the following quote, attributed
       to an unnamed ARIN official:

         "ARIN has received a fraud report from you and is evaluating it," a spokesperson
         for ARIN said.

    *  Public records freely available on the California Secretary of State's web site
       indicate quite clearly that the California corporate entity named in the blog
       article was incorporated in California on 8/15/2006, that it subsequently failed
       to file its legally required annual Statement of Information as of 8/31/2010,
       that it has likewise failed to file its legally required annual Statement of
       Information continuously, and every year since 2010, and that as a result of
       these failures, this entity was administratively dissolved by the California
       Secretary of State's office as of 8/29/2012, nearly a decade ago.

    *  The company's web site indicates clearly that the company is still doing business
       within the state of California under the trade name mentioned in the Krebs blog
       article which is the same one associated with the ARIN organization handle CENTA-3.

    *  The company's physical location, as given in the ARIN WHOIS record for both the
       organization and its contact points appears to be nothing more than a UPS P.O.
       box located in Fremont, California.

    *  The company's phone number, as given both on its web site and in its associated
       ARIN WHOIS records rings as BUSY, even at 1:30 AM, California time.

    *  A check of public records relating to Fictitious Business Names registered in
       Alameda County, California (which contains Fremont, California) shows there as
       being no record of any registered Fictitious Business Name having the name of
       this company in Alameda County.

    *  Despite all of the foregoing, this long-dead California corporate entity, which
       is designated in the ARIN WHOIS data base via the handle CENTA-3, as of this
       moment appears to still be a member in good standing of ARIN, holding one ARIN-
       issued ASN and also 4094 ARIN-issued IPv4 addresses.

I look forward to your explanation of how the above set of facts comports with current
ARIN policy and/or current ARIN procedures, or with the statement that was given, by
ARIN, to the press regarding this matter back in October of 2020.


Regards,
rfg


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list