On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 12:19 PM John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2022, at 3:12 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 11:18 AM Paul E McNary <pmcn...@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. Regards, Bill Herrin -- For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/ _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.