On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:54:17 +0000 Erik Bais <erik@bais.name> wrote:
Hi Andre,
Hello Erik,
Definition of Abuse as it should be defined by RIPE --------------------------------------------------------------------- The use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource
I'll give an example :
Latest version is: The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource thank you, all your examples fit into the above definition <snip>
Disciplinary actions (like de-registration due to abuse for instance) should not be up to the NCC, unless the information provided for registration isn´t correct. Everything else is not within the scope of the NCC imho. It should be taken up to the local law enforcement if things are not in compliance with the law ... And that could be different in each country of this huge service region... Moving into any other direction might be a very slippery slope we are getting ourselves into ... Ambition is good, but we shouldn't outreach our place in this delicate environment ...
all very valid Erik, but this not an attempt to turn RIPE into an Internet Police, simply a definition or guide of what abuse is. If RIPE were to de-register a resource, this is also for abuse (i.e supplying fake information) As civil society, we should be able to define what constitutes Abuse, as everyone is talking about abuse and agreeing that this is good or that is bad, but some things that we all seem to agree on - we actually do not even come close to agreeing on, as many people, in many countries and many societies have different ideas on what abuse is. So, setting a general definition of abuse is important This is the "Abuse" workgroup - Yet there is no definition of "abuse" It is the same as configuring an "e-mail" work group and nobody can agree on what "e-mail" is... So, this definition is not for enforcement, or law enforcement or anything other than simply to define the core of what it is and to do so in a more formal manner. Andre