[Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
bzs at world.std.com
Sat Sep 9 16:43:55 UTC 2006
On September 8, 2006 at 16:28 fergdawg at netzero.net (Fergie) wrote:
> I like how Jack Bates framed it: The IP address space is a "community
> asset" and as such, the allocation of it needs to be done in a way
> which serves & benefits the Internet community at-large.
Which would form a strong analogy to the FCC's original legal
justification for existence in 1934 which was that the radio spectrum
is a limited, public trust and as such the FCC is given the power to
regulate it and its contents in the public's interest (and, hence, to
regulate content in "the public interest".)
I would be very careful what I wish for.
Fortunately IPv6 could be a counter-balance to any claims of
jurisdiction based on limited address space though perhaps the camel's
nose will get into the tent first; in theory all address space is
finite, even if vast.
It's hard to imagine power over content achieved based on IPv4's
limited address space would be later yielded for IPv6 any more than
the tiny spectrum space of 1934 was ever yielded due to the vast
expansion of spectrum afforded by subsequent improved technology.
The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Login: Nationwide
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
More information about the NANOG