<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
On Jun 4, 2015, at 11:58 AM, Matthew Kaufman <<a href="mailto:matthew@matthew.at" class="">matthew@matthew.at</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/4/2015 8:36 AM, John Curran wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:256B1FF7-FEDF-4B82-960A-F28C0659A635@corp.arin.net" type="cite" class="">
On Jun 4, 2015, at 10:43 AM, Mike Burns <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mike@iptrading.com" class="">mike@iptrading.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class=""><span style="color: rgb(31, 73,
125); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;" class="">I refused to cooperate with any needs test but told them I would send them a copy of the contract and they could
also communicate with the seller.</span></blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="">PPML Folks - </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> I believe we are expected to follow the community-developed policy and </div>
<div class=""> that means that parties which don’t provide the documentation necessary</div>
<div class=""> to allow needs-assessment cannot receive number resource via transfer.</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
We need better language for this. Mike "received number resource via transfer". What he didn't receive was "a transfer of a record in the ARIN registry", because he didn't provide the documentation necessary for the community-developed policy for recording
a transfer in that registry.<br class="">
<br class="">
But he's got a contract which - though I have not seen it myself - I would not at all be surprised does in fact transfer the right to use those integers as addresses on the global Internet from someone else to Mike.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Matthew - </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
Bingo! What exactly was transferred by that contract, and how did the original party have the</div>
<div>“rights” that they claimed to sell to Mike? If it’s rights in the registry, we know those only transfer</div>
<div>per the policies of the community. If it’s something else, where do those rights originate and </div>
<div>what exactly are the rights being sold?</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>We’ve got many transfers of address blocks being done where the contract says “transfer of </div>
<div>the rights to use and be associated with the IP address entry in the Internet number registry”</div>
<div>For such transfers, the original party can show the RSA or LRSA as proof that they have the</div>
<div>rights to which they speak, or can point to the Whois and ask ARIN (as the registry admin) to </div>
<div>confirm such if they do not happen to have an L/RSA. In such cases, the recipient receives </div>
<div>the same rights. All of this is fairly clear, and makes a lot of sense to judges (at least from </div>
<div>my decade or so dealing with it.)</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>In the alternative formulation, someone sold Mike (as you put it) the "the right to use those</div>
<div>integers as addresses on the global Internet”… It is not at all clear how someone ever </div>
<div>obtained that right so that it could be sold, or even how that right is enforceable since “the </div>
<div>global Internet” would imply the entities that operate the global routing table. </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Do you believe that ARIN issues " "the right to use those integers as addresses on the global</div>
<div>Internet” with our IPv4 and IPv6 blocks that we assign out today? </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>I know that legally we have no way of stating we are giving someone “the right to use those</div>
<div>integers as addresses on the global Internet” - at best, we can say that we provide them </div>
<div>exclusive association and use in the Internet numbers registry system, including the right </div>
<div>to transfer in accordance with policy. </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>(Mind you, we could actually say “the exclusive right to use in the global Internet routing table </div>
<div>as maintained by ARIN’s registry users” but doing that would require that ARIN’s registry users</div>
<div>be obligated to only route blocks on behalf of the parties listed in the registry… does anyone </div>
<div>really want this obligation with the Internet numbers registry system? As someone whose run </div>
<div>several Internet service providers, I personally wouldn’t wish that if I were still doing so, but </div>
<div>“rights” have to come from somewhere and if they are anything more that rights to entries in</div>
<div>the registry, we need to figure out fairly quickly what they are, and how they are made real.)</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>As I said earlier, all of this becomes quite important if parties are to have legal rights that they </div>
<div>can rely upon and enforce in court.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>ARIN</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</body>
</html>