On Feb 24, 2014, at 8:14 PM, Matthew Kaufman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2/24/2014 5:10 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Look at the effect house flipping had on the California real estate market. >> This has been harmful in a number of ways and I see no reason to believe >> that similar behavior, if allowed, in the IP address realm would not be even >> more harmful. > > Because the people speculatively buying up /24s and giving them a coat of > fresh paint and replacing the old carpet with new wood floors would do what, > exactly? First, you are assuming that all speculative IP purchases would be for flipping. In this case, there is a motivation also available for speculation in terms of attempting to deprive other organizations of the ability to compete. It allows heavily resourced organizations to distort the competitive landscape and would thus be an unfair policy. (Fair is one of the requirements for the AC to advance policy). Second, speculators purchasing addresses in hopes of flipping them (perhaps purchasing black-listed addresses, getting them off the BLs, and then reselling them) would also be looking to make a profit and would likely distort the pricing of said addresses in the process. Such distortions, when they occur, are rarely to the benefit of the overall community. Owen _______________________________________________ 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.
