On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:31 PM, David Huberman <[email protected]> wrote: > So what if the policy/process resulted in 8.2 requests being something like: > > - submit request form > - attach letter from attorney currently admitted to a bar[1] indicating the > transfer request is bona fide > > That's how it's done in business when assuming contracts, right?
Where all parties to a transaction are represented by competent counsel, and due diligent is done by all parties, things might be easier. When an interested party may not even be at the table (the "true" original register of the resource), things can get complicated down the road (if any dispute actually happens). Instead, perhaps of simply being admitted, you want a higher standard of the equivalent of a title company/insurance to research the transaction history, and insure it against future claims. Other than moving the costs (and any delays and/or rejection) from ARIN to some 3rd party company, I am not sure it would change the results. The problem is fundamentally the same problem that existing title companies have in lands that have not changed hands since, well, forever, and whose records are written with knives on bear skins. Gary _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
