On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 5:32 AM Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> One could argue that the enforceability of that revocation alone could be > problematic if the non-domestic entity is able to get a local injunction in > their home country against it. It is indeed questionable as to whether or > not *that* injunction would be enforceable in the United States, but > there’s always the risk of ARIN representatives being held liable should > they travel to the issuing country. And don’t forget, ARIN staff, board, > and AC members regularly travel to quite a number of foreign countries on > official business (I’m typing this from RIPE79 in Rotterdam, for example…), > so this risk may not be as theoretical as one would assume. > Hi Chris, Sure, and if you're charged with murder in Japan while you're in Rotterdam you best not show up at NRT. This feels like a reach to me. If it's a credible risk, I'd like to understand more about what makes it credible. >From a lawyer who can talk about examples of it happening and demonstrate the connection to the example organization's willingness to intentionally do business with a foreign entity. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin [email protected] https://bill.herrin.us/
_______________________________________________ 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.
