[72103] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Can a Customer take their IP's with them? (Court says yes!)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (alex@yuriev.com)
Tue Jun 29 18:38:05 2004
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:59:47 -0400
From: alex@yuriev.com
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406292224460.4317-100000@server2.tcw.telecomplete.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > > Hi James,
> > > i would agree except NAC seems to have done nothing unreasonable and are
> > > executing cancellation clauses in there contract which are pretty standard. The
> > > customer's had plenty of time to sort things and they have iether been unable to
> > > or unwilling to move out in the lengthy period given.
> >
> > How do you arrive at this conclusion? Did you read the filings? This is not
> > the customers position. Since I have only the customers filings and the judges
> > TRO online it maybe that NAC has counter claims of their own. However
>
> The customer's unhappy.. but I dont see anything bad going on here..
It is very simple -
Plaintiff files a motion.
Defendant tries to have it dismissed (or maybe for whatever reason
decides that as the network engineers they
don't care about what a court has to say and ignores it)
Plaintiff shows that he has a case.
Defendant is unable to convince a judge that the plaintiff is full
Judge grants the TRO.
Defendant waves arms on nanog-l.
Moral -
When a legal system is involved, use the legal system, not the
nanog-l. The former provides provides ample of opportunities to
deal with the issues, while the later only provides ample of
opportunities to do hand waving.
> The customer's wording is sloppy for a legal doc and they have silly
> points raised, like because nac wont accept payment by credit card they
> are forced to pay off their outstanding balance hence having to pay twice
> (one to the card one to nac) .. well duh .. thats how it works.
> Non-portability of IP space is well known, sure, its hard work and I
> wouldnt wish to do it but its normal - right?
The customer wording happened to be excellent - and TRO is a proof
of it. The court does not care about the good of internet and
portability/non-portability of IP address space because it is not the case
in front of it.
> Presumably the judge is unsure and doing what seems to be a sensible option..
Never presume. Always file.
Alex
