As I read the proposal cutting off bogus LIRs seems to be the goal rather than cutting off a legitimate but careless player. There seem to be quite a few such given the coming wg meeting has a preso on just this topic.
--srs ________________________________ From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> on behalf of Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 3:08 PM To: Nick Hilliard Cc: Shane Kerr; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Legality of proposal (apologies) On Fri, 17 May 2019, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Shane Kerr wrote on 17/05/2019 08:45: >> All I can say is that the law is stupid then, and it SHOULD allow the >> proposed policy. ? > > fundamentally, it shouldn't. Proportionality is a cornerstone of most legal > systems - if you don't have proportionality, you end up with tyranny. The > idea of threatening to cut off a LIR because they haven't updated an abuse > contact is completely disproportionate to the scale of the policy infraction. Hi, It's probably not "haven't updated" but instead "haven't created". Ideally this would also cover cases where company X deliberately inserts an e-mail address from someone which has nothing to do with the numbering resource... at least the legitimate owner of such mailbox should be able to resort to someone (hopefully not a court!) to have that corrected in the registry....... We had that with our postal address from an ARIN member some years ago. :/ Carlos > Nick >
