<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:PMingLiU;
panose-1:2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@PMingLiU";
panose-1:2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Courier New";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>John,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>The core syllogism you constructed below is impressive (and witty). I do have some observations about your premises.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>* * *<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>I'm pretty sure there are valid contracts (verbal and otherwise) for which <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>there is no document. When I got my IANAL certificate, I thought I knew <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>that a valid contract required only an exchange of consideration and <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>assent by both parties.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> If by “valid”, you mean enforceable, you’re missing some necessary steps to support this assertion. The party trying to enforce an “informal” oral agreement has to prove the existence of the agreement and the parties’ assent to the term or condition at issue. Both of these are very difficult hurdles to overcome. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>I do understand that there has been considerable assertion that there is <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>no contract with "legacy" address resource holders, but has this been <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>stipulated or in some other way achieved reality?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> As mentioned above, you’ve placed the burden on the wrong party. Those asserting the existence of an undocumented informal/oral agreement bear the burden to prove the existence of the agreement, and establish its terms and conditions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>The exchange of consideration that I have always imputed is: I will give <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>you these numbers -> I will go build the Intertubez. And how could there <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>not be assent? If that _IS_ the bargain, I think the pioneers get a <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>permanent let pass on unwanted changes to the status quo.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> I suspect that I’m not catching all of the nuisance in your statement above, but you appear to be removing an important fact. Individuals and companies serving as US contractors -- while acting on the USG’s behalf -- gave out the legacy IP numbers to end users and network operators.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>If, on the other hand, there was, in fact, no valid exchange of <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>consideration or mutual assent, do these folks have any enduring rights <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>of use at all? In particular, I think they or their agents don't get to <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>expand their original bargain to preserve a potential windfall. Invisible <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>hand be damned.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> If there was no original contract between any given legacy holder and the person/entity serving the role of Internet registrar at the time, then there is no original bargain between these parties to expand or contract. This, however, does not mean that the legacy holder lacks any rights in its numbers. It simply means that we must look somewhere else to define the scope of those rights.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Note well: I am not suggesting an assault on the status of legacy numbers <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>or their holders, but if proposers be proposing changes to policy toward <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>these folks, perhaps the solidification of first principles may be in <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>order.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> I’m gathering that this sentiment is at the core of much of the opposition to proposals 171-173. I’d like to express an alternative sentiment in the form of a question. Can/should transfer policies be designed to further important policy goals and effectively (and practically) address the challenges facing the ARIN community without inviting disputes on first principles between ARIN and off-contract legacy resource holders? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>I don't think I gave any advice here.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><< M Lindsey >> Nice!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:#404040'>Marc Lindsey<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#686667'>Levine, Blaszak, Block & Boothby, LLP<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#686667'>2001 L Street, NW Suite 900<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#686667'>Washington, DC 20036<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#595959'>Phone:</span><span style='color:#007BAF'> (202) 857-2564<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#686667'>Email:</span><span style='color:blue'> </span><span style='color:#007BAF'><a href="mailto:adelgado@lb3law.com"><span style='color:#007BAF'>mlindsey@lb3law.com</span></a></span><span style='color:#003399'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>