In message <cakvlzuhjwzdv38xs-+fame183mqzg6cvq-wio_khrksv3uy...@mail.gmail.com>, denis walker <[email protected]> wrote:
>A lot of this discussion is about interpreting one defined purpose trying >to make everything fit in order to 'get around' a legal review. That legal >review is based on the RIPE NCC legal team doing what they are paid >for...to protect the RIPE NCC from legal action... I have often opined that any competent attorney can make a reasonably good case for never even getting out of bed in the morning, let alone going in to work, because of the potential for litigation that may arise therefrom. The legally safest course of action is always to do absolutely nothing. (It is just rather unfortunate that abject poverty and starvation may ensue.) As regards to the "Legal Analysis" that was posted here recently, to my eyes it looked rather less like a legal analysis than it did a personal political manefesto. All sorts of bold assertions were made of the form "this must be this way" and "that must be that way" but with nary a single reference to any applicable statue or precedent. (Perhaps the author did have an abundance of such references, but just omitted them in an effort to dumb down the content for its intended audience.) Regards, rfg -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/db-wg
