[Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
joe at via.net
Fri Sep 8 17:36:34 UTC 2006
I read the complaint. I don't like the fact that a lot of my friends
are named in the suit, but I think there are some
points worth discussing within the community:
1) IP address blocks are not 'property'
"Domains are not property. The assignee of a domain has no
Network Solutions made this same argument years ago. That was
their shield against lawsuits when negligence
(or worse) on NetSols part would cause a domain to be
erroneously transferred. When mistakes were made,
Network Solutions was notoriously unwilling to reverse the
transaction to correct the error.
Then they got sued for refusing to reverse a fradulent domain
transfer, and they lost. The case had the side effect of setting
the precedent that domains *are* in fact tangible property. Now
when a registrar or registry makes a mistake, they can be
legally held responsible. (What case was that? Kremen v. Network
I would say that's an improvement.
2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order?
3) What's wrong with treating assignments like property and setting
up a market to buy and sell them? There's plenty of precedent for this:
Mineral rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum.
If a given commodity is truly scarce, nothing works as good as
the free market in encouraging consumers to conserve and make the best
use of it.
joe at via.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NANOG