Not sure if this is really the main discussion but the point about
owning IP addresses was an example of something that is actually the
correct way it works, despite what happens in practice people don't own
it, cannot sell it (even if they believe they have the absolute right to
sell - excluding legacy cases). The fact is that it CAN be revoked as it
is not their property as something that you buy.
In my view believing that someone "own" IP addresses has just the
propose to be able to use it for what is not intended or was never
thought (like sell it, speculate, etc). Address Space is to make the
Internet work where it should not for people use in a very private and
out of what is was always intended to.
Fernando
On 02/05/2019 12:35, William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 11:50 PM Fernando Frediani
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Why people always believe they "own" IP address space and nobody can
take it from them as if it was a router or a server purchased with a
invoice and declared in their annual balance ?
Several reasons.
1. Revocation of a properly registered address space has never
happened before, at least not in North America. The few times any sort
of revocation has happened is when there was provable fraud in the
-original- application, ownership was claimed by someone who was
provably acting without the authorization of the original registrant,
or periodic registratino fees consented to under written contract with
ARIN were not paid for an extended period of time. Over ARIN's
existence there have been plenty of opportunities for ARIN to revoke
addresses for other bad behaviors including violations of the policy
manual. They have always declined to do so.
The legal Doctrine of Laches more or less says that a right not
enforced is a right you do not have, regardless of writings to the
contrary. ARIN has never enforced a claim incompatible with the
registrants' ownership of their IP addresses.
2. Prior to 1997, the documents associated with registration neither
expressed nor implied any right for the registry to revoke a
registration for any reason.
3. If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. The registrant has exclusive
control of the block of the number resource to the extent that use by
anyone else on the Internet is universally held to be abusive. They
can be sold or rented without permission or attachment and bought with
minimal registration paperwork (or none if you're willing to operate
on a contract with the averred registrant rather than updating the
registration). Addresses are used in a manner that closely aligns with
the common law understanding of an intellectual property. For a court
to find otherwise, a litigant would have to affirmatively prove that
this thing which quacks like a duck is in fact a zebra. This has not
been done and there is reason to believe it is not doable.
That's why folks like me believe we own our IP addresses.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William Herrin ................ [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
