Well if it's a fundamental right to do business, and someone can't do business because their network is subject to a DDoS or their communication medium (email) is spammed by someone from a network where the network operator "ignores" abuse emails, and has to spend money sorting through spam emails, then this policy promotes so called "business rights"

----

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:22 AM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 29/04/2020 16:55:
> So, it's the security guys, saying
>
> This may help a bit, but won't solve all problems.
>
> versus the infrastructure operators saying
>
> Beware! This it creating huge costs and will not help at all, and
> answering two mails a year will be our ruin.

The root problem is that the policy proposes to use the RIPE NCC to
enforce abuse management processes.

The specifics in this iteration of the document are to threaten and then
act to deregister an organisation's number resources - and thereby
remove their ability to conduct business - if the organisation declines
to handle abuse complaints over email.

To be clear, it's a fundamental right in large chunks of the RIPE
service region to conduct business. If the RIPE NCC acts to threaten to
remove this ability to conduct business, there would need to be sound
legal justification for doing so.

Nick