[138989] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Nortel, in bankruptcy, sells IPv4 address block for $7.5 million
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Thu Mar 24 19:21:47 2011
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <986BA7D8-D699-4D93-9FCC-6F44FEB52ED7@delong.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:19:56 -1000
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Owen,
I (and I presume Eric Goldman, author of the post I referenced) was =
looking at Judge James Ware's actual ruling =
(http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/5:=
2006cv02554/181054/41/). I don't see anything in there discussing that =
'the transfer had to be done in a manner that complied with ARIN policy' =
or Kremen was 'required to sign the RSA'. It isn't a very long document =
(and surprisingly easy to read for a court judgement). Not being a =
lawyer, I can't be certain, but all I see is "time-barred" and "statute =
of limitations". The only thing relevant I can see in subsequent filings =
is that Kremen and ARIN came to a settlement in which ARIN didn't have =
to do anything and Kremen wouldn't pursue the matter. Can you point to =
where the Judge said anything (much less definitively) about complying =
with ARIN policy, signing an RSA, etc.?
Regards,
-drc
On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> The judge definitely ruled that the transfer had to be done in a =
manner that
> complied with ARIN policy and made it clear that the recipient was, =
indeed,
> required to sign the RSA.
>=20
> So, yes, Kremen also lost on the address policy basis, which I believe =
may
> have been an additional ruling subsequent to what is covered at the =
cited URL.
>=20
> Owen
>=20
>=20
> Sent from my iPad
>=20
> On Mar 24, 2011, at 12:24 PM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> =
wrote:
>=20
>> On Mar 24, 2011, at 8:15 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Legacy address transferability has been disputed before. Kremen v.
>>> ARIN. Kremen lost.
>>=20
>> Yes, Kremen lost, but not based on anything related to address =
policy:
>>=20
>> http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2007/01/kremen_loses_ch_1.htm
>>=20
>> Regards,
>> -drc
>>=20
>=20
