Re: [ncc-services-wg] New RIPE NCC Procedural Document Available
Dear ncc-services-wg, address-policy-wg,
From the document:
[...] 4.2 Violation of RIPE Policy, Law or Contract The RIPE NCC will de-register the independent Internet number resources in case of a fundamental breach of contract by the End User, supported by a Dutch court order; or Violation of Law by the End User, supported by a Dutch court order; or violation of RIPE Policy by the End User. [...] IANAL, so please forgive me if this course of inquiry is completely misguided, but does this not explicitly put the validity of resource assignments in the hands of Dutch courts and Dutch prosecutors? RIPE NCC, as an organization domiciled in the Netherlands would at all times have to comply with valid court orders. However, prior to the existence of a direct contractual relationship with end users and this policy, RIPE NCC merely served as a custodian for a database. Challenging the contents of this database would have been a legal adventure. With the introduction of complete contractual chain through RIPE NCC, a LIR, and the end user, combined with this formal explicit policy to which the end user and the LIR must agree - isn't there a potential loophole being created for an enterprising litigant to impose Dutch legislation where it is might be favorable to their cause on foreign end users? Certainly, if this interpretation isn't overly naive, such a loophole was not the intention of policy 2007-01. Has the RIPE NCC received any legal counseling on this matter, and would it be willing to publish the opinion they were provided with? -- Respectfully yours, David Monosov Andrea Cima wrote:
[Apologies for duplicate emails]
Dear Colleagues,
The RIPE NCC has published a new RIPE NCC procedural document: ripe-475, "Independent Internet Number Resources Contractual Relationship Changes between sponsoring LIR and End User"
This document describes the steps to be taken when there are changes in the contractual relationship between the End User of independent Internet number resources and the sponsoring Local Internet Registry (LIR). It also describes the scenarios in which the RIPE NCC may de-register independent Internet number resources and what happens to those resources once they are de-registered.
The new document is available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-475.html
Kind regards,
Andrea Cima RIPE NCC
David, On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 21:08 +0200, David Monosov wrote:
Dear ncc-services-wg, address-policy-wg,
From the document:
[...]
4.2 Violation of RIPE Policy, Law or Contract
The RIPE NCC will de-register the independent Internet number resources in case of a fundamental breach of contract by the End User, supported by a Dutch court order; or
Violation of Law by the End User, supported by a Dutch court order; or violation of RIPE Policy by the End User.
[...]
IANAL, so please forgive me if this course of inquiry is completely misguided, but does this not explicitly put the validity of resource assignments in the hands of Dutch courts and Dutch prosecutors?
RIPE NCC, as an organization domiciled in the Netherlands would at all times have to comply with valid court orders. However, prior to the existence of a direct contractual relationship with end users and this policy, RIPE NCC merely served as a custodian for a database. Challenging the contents of this database would have been a legal adventure.
With the introduction of complete contractual chain through RIPE NCC, a LIR, and the end user, combined with this formal explicit policy to which the end user and the LIR must agree - isn't there a potential loophole being created for an enterprising litigant to impose Dutch legislation where it is might be favorable to their cause on foreign end users?
Certainly, if this interpretation isn't overly naive, such a loophole was not the intention of policy 2007-01. Has the RIPE NCC received any legal counseling on this matter, and would it be willing to publish the opinion they were provided with?
All that this says is that the RIPE NCC is bound by Dutch law, which was always the case, with or without a contract. Someone could always take the RIPE NCC to court, in the Netherlands or in any other jurisdiction on the planet that will accept the case. Remember, the point of this endeavor is to identify who is responsible for any given assignment. This should result in less legal pain, not more. -- Shane
Shane Kerr wrote:
Someone could always take the RIPE NCC to court, in the Netherlands or in any other jurisdiction on the planet that will accept the case.
And so what? It is very cheap for example in Ukraine to make Ukrainian court decision that 193.0.18.0/22 belongs to Max Tulyev :) Which kind of court orders RIPE NCC will really accept? Only Dutch or not? If not - what else? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO)
Hello Max, Probably only Dutch court. But Dutch court will accept almost all decisions made by any court in the EU. That way Dutch court will take the decision of the other court and without looking at if it is correct it will make the same decision (just a technical point). A few weeks back this was done in a case, see also: http://tweakers.net/nieuws/61109/oostenrijkse-rechter-veroordeelt-nederlands e-hostingprovider.html (Dutch). Google translate should be able to translate it. With kind regards, Mark Scholten -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Max Tulyev Sent: dinsdag 28 juli 2009 22:42 To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] New RIPE NCC Procedural Document Available Shane Kerr wrote:
Someone could always take the RIPE NCC to court, in the Netherlands or in any other jurisdiction on the planet that will accept the case.
And so what? It is very cheap for example in Ukraine to make Ukrainian court decision that 193.0.18.0/22 belongs to Max Tulyev :) Which kind of court orders RIPE NCC will really accept? Only Dutch or not? If not - what else? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO)
Hi Max and Mark,
Probably only Dutch court. But Dutch court will accept almost all decisions made by any court in the EU. That way Dutch court will take the decision of the other court and without looking at if it is correct it will make the same decision (just a technical point).
Please take this discussion off the policy list. NCC services would be more appropriate. Thanks, Sander
Hi Max and Mark,
Probably only Dutch court. But Dutch court will accept almost all decisions made by any court in the EU. That way Dutch court will take the decision of the other court and without looking at if it is correct it will make the same decision (just a technical point).
Please take this discussion off the policy list. NCC services would be more appropriate.
That sounds much harsher than I intended... I was just trying to keep discussions on the right list, and I wrote that message much too quickly. My apologies for the very bad wording. Sander APWG co-chair
Hi Sander, NCC services WG is only for LIRs AFAIR. This case is about the life cycle of the PI space, so it should be interesting for non-members too, am I right? Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi Max and Mark,
Probably only Dutch court. But Dutch court will accept almost all decisions made by any court in the EU. That way Dutch court will take the decision of the other court and without looking at if it is correct it will make the same decision (just a technical point).
Please take this discussion off the policy list. NCC services would be more appropriate.
Thanks, Sander
-- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO)
Hi Max,
NCC services WG is only for LIRs AFAIR. This case is about the life cycle of the PI space, so it should be interesting for non-members too, am I right?
The NCC services WG is just like all other RIPE WG's: completely open. As far as I know the only thing that is 'members only' is the RIPE NCC General Meeting. Sander
participants (5)
-
David Monosov -
Max Tulyev -
Sander Steffann -
Shane Kerr -
Stream Service || Mark Scholten