Does anyone have experience with the seizure of IP addresses at RIPE?
Dear, we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the members IP addresses. However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings. The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses. That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc. Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law? -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen Thomas Czarnetzki ------------------------------------------------- comtrance - your communication entrance E-Mail: t.czarnetzki@comtrance.net Internet: http://www.comtrance.net Telefon: +49 (211) 271 59 - 20 Fax: +49 (211) 271 59 - 21 Notfall-Support (24/7): +49 (211) 271 59 - 15 Unternehmenssitz: comtrance service GmbH | In der Steele 35 | 40599 Düsseldorf Handelsregister: AG Düsseldorf / HRB 96082 | Ust-ID: DE-349229353 | Geschäftsführer: Thomas Czarnetzki Alle unsere Leistungen erfolgen ausschließlich auf Basis unserer Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen.
Hi, I am not a lawyer, but I believe the court may be making a fundamental mistake in treating IP addresses as transferable assets. In practice, IP addresses are not property but usage rights, comparable to frequency spectrum licenses in telecommunications. For example, if a company holds a frequency license in one jurisdiction, that license cannot simply be seized and reassigned to an unrelated third party by a foreign court. The license remains subject to the authority of the issuing body, which can revoke or reallocate it if regulatory conditions are not met. By the same logic, IP address allocations are managed by RIPE under specific membership and policy rules. Attempting to enforce their transfer outside RIPE’s framework risks immediate revocation, since RIPE retains ultimate authority over allocation and registration. This makes it questionable whether a garnishment or transfer order from a national court can override RIPE’s regulatory framework. All above is just humble opinion. On Fri, 2025-08-22 at 11:36 +0200, Thomas Czarnetzki wrote:
Dear,
we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the member’s IP addresses.
However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings.
The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses.
That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc.
Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law?
National law, as well as a legal court order, will supersede a private organisation's (membership association in this case) policies. Within EU, Brussels I bis regulation allows, among other things, the enforcing of (example) German court orders in The Netherlands with some exceptions. See https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32012R1215 Kaj ________________________________ From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <admin@nuclearcat.com> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2025 10:04 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Does anyone have experience with the seizure of IP addresses at RIPE? [You don't often get email from admin@nuclearcat.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] Hi, I am not a lawyer, but I believe the court may be making a fundamental mistake in treating IP addresses as transferable assets. In practice, IP addresses are not property but usage rights, comparable to frequency spectrum licenses in telecommunications. For example, if a company holds a frequency license in one jurisdiction, that license cannot simply be seized and reassigned to an unrelated third party by a foreign court. The license remains subject to the authority of the issuing body, which can revoke or reallocate it if regulatory conditions are not met. By the same logic, IP address allocations are managed by RIPE under specific membership and policy rules. Attempting to enforce their transfer outside RIPE’s framework risks immediate revocation, since RIPE retains ultimate authority over allocation and registration. This makes it questionable whether a garnishment or transfer order from a national court can override RIPE’s regulatory framework. All above is just humble opinion. On Fri, 2025-08-22 at 11:36 +0200, Thomas Czarnetzki wrote:
Dear,
we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the member’s IP addresses.
However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings.
The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses.
That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc.
Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law?
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmy.ripe.net%2F%23%2Faccount-details&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5bbb1e46976e4fd1558b08dde3cea4f4%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638917198876784622%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ErgchhTXGVay%2BAmUPyNOlzbAeQM76bGqZYM9OWgXnVg%3D&reserved=0<https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details>. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fs%2Fmembers-discuss-subscription-options%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5bbb1e46976e4fd1558b08dde3cea4f4%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638917198876809887%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=S0WV42zIEXkoY8dwmAY4Xq%2B7vY9qG1XWmYxuEfo9UG0%3D&reserved=0<https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/>
I see it similarly. RIPE cannot simply "bend" the law to suit itself. While IPs do not technically "belong" to the LIR, they nevertheless have a corresponding "value" (comparable to domains). And those can also be seized/liquidated. Therefore, a transfer can certainly take place here. After all, vast amounts of IPs are being transferred/sold between individual LIRs every day. As for the argument that one must be an LIR in order to transfer IPs: Here, RIPE could either convert the PA space into PI space, or transfer the IPs to us as an LIR, and we would then manage them on behalf of the claimant. Technically, all of this is possible and is (if at all) only prevented by RIPE's "rules." And as already mentioned, those cannot be in conflict with applicable law. Ultimately, this is more about a fundamental discussion and approach. It is becoming increasingly common for defaulting customers to hold IP networks, so our case could certainly occur more frequently. Thomas Von: Kaj Niemi <kajtzu@basen.net> Gesendet: Montag, 25. August 2025 14:09 An: members-discuss@ripe.net; nuclearcat@nuclearcat.com Betreff: [members-discuss] Re: Does anyone have experience with the seizure of IP addresses at RIPE? National law, as well as a legal court order, will supersede a private organisation's (membership association in this case) policies. Within EU, Brussels I bis regulation allows, among other things, the enforcing of (example) German court orders in The Netherlands with some exceptions. See https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32012R1215 Kaj _____ From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <admin@nuclearcat.com <mailto:admin@nuclearcat.com> > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2025 10:04 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> > Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Does anyone have experience with the seizure of IP addresses at RIPE? [You don't often get email from admin@nuclearcat.com <mailto:admin@nuclearcat.com> . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] Hi, I am not a lawyer, but I believe the court may be making a fundamental mistake in treating IP addresses as transferable assets. In practice, IP addresses are not property but usage rights, comparable to frequency spectrum licenses in telecommunications. For example, if a company holds a frequency license in one jurisdiction, that license cannot simply be seized and reassigned to an unrelated third party by a foreign court. The license remains subject to the authority of the issuing body, which can revoke or reallocate it if regulatory conditions are not met. By the same logic, IP address allocations are managed by RIPE under specific membership and policy rules. Attempting to enforce their transfer outside RIPE's framework risks immediate revocation, since RIPE retains ultimate authority over allocation and registration. This makes it questionable whether a garnishment or transfer order from a national court can override RIPE's regulatory framework. All above is just humble opinion. On Fri, 2025-08-22 at 11:36 +0200, Thomas Czarnetzki wrote:
Dear,
we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the member's IP addresses.
However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings.
The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses.
That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc.
Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law?
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmy.ripe.ne t%2F%23%2Faccount-details <https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details> &data=05%7C02%7C%7C5bbb1e46976e4fd1558b08dde3cea4f4%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81 d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638917198876784622%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1h cGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3 D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ErgchhTXGVay%2BAmUPyNOlzbAeQM76bGqZYM9OWgXnVg%3D& reserved=0. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.n et%2Fs%2Fmembers-discuss-subscription-options%2F <https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/> &data=05%7C02%7C%7C5bbb1e46976e4fd1558b08dde3cea4f4%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81 d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638917198876809887%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1h cGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3 D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=S0WV42zIEXkoY8dwmAY4Xq%2B7vY9qG1XWmYxuEfo9UG0%3D& reserved=0
Il 22/08/2025 11:36, Thomas Czarnetzki ha scritto:
Dear,
we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the member’s IP addresses.
I imagine that the judgment you have is in favor of your client, and not of you as the sponsoring LIR. And in this respect RIPE is right: there is no way to transfer the assignment of an IP block to anyone who is not a RIPE member; therefore, either you obtain a judgment that specifically states that the IP block must be assigned to you (the sponsoring LIR) on behalf of your client, or that judgment is worthless. Apart from this: Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 is not of universal applicability, and there are many cases where it does not apply. For example, if insolvency proceedings are involved... In any case, to invoke it you must have obtained from the court a European Enforcement Order certificate: do you have it? I also have doubts that an IP block can be subject to attachment: I believe it could be seized and reassigned in order to safeguard the services provided through it, but I doubt that it could simply be attached for its economic value, merely as a guarantee or coverage of a financial debt unrelated to the block itself. -- Franco Tauceri *DomainRegister* m: 39.3483064202 w: https://DomainRegister.international <https://DomainRegister.international> e: franco.tauceri@domainregister.it -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
Thomas So let me see if I can understand the situation. You have supposedly a legal issue which involves two RIPE members (you plus another in Germany). Since you have I assume failed to resolve the issue between the other companies and yourselves you’re now trying a different “strategy”. So instead of resolving it between yourselves and maybe via your lawyers or the German courts you decided to post about it to a mailing list? You also went to the trouble of accusing RIPE NCC of acting illegally? How is either of these things going to help your case? I’m fascinated how you think that: * Other members want to know about this * You think you can resolve a legal issue on a mailing list * Defaming RIPE NCC on a mailing list is going to win you brownie points with the very people you need to help you Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072<tel:+353599183072> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours. From: Thomas Czarnetzki <t.czarnetzki@comtrance.net> Date: Monday, 25 August 2025 at 06:07 To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: [members-discuss] Does anyone have experience with the seizure of IP addresses at RIPE? [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear, we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the member's IP addresses. However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings. The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses. That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc. Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law? -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen Thomas Czarnetzki ------------------------------------------------- comtrance - your communication entrance E-Mail: t.czarnetzki@comtrance.net Internet: http://www.comtrance.net Telefon: +49 (211) 271 59 - 20 Fax: +49 (211) 271 59 - 21 Notfall-Support (24/7): +49 (211) 271 59 - 15 Unternehmenssitz: comtrance service GmbH | In der Steele 35 | 40599 Düsseldorf Handelsregister: AG Düsseldorf / HRB 96082 | Ust-ID: DE-349229353 | Geschäftsführer: Thomas Czarnetzki Alle unsere Leistungen erfolgen ausschließlich auf Basis unserer Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen. To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details. Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription. Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
Dear, You and (apparently) the court in which you won the case has a poor understanding of what IP addresses are. IP addresses are not the property of LIR, they do not have proprietary properties or an object of law. The address space is only managed by RIPE, but it is not an object of ownership or an object that can be seized. Also note that this is not even an object that is "owned" by LIR. It's like if you rented a car, and someone tried to recover it in court in their favor for your debts. It's hard to say what your prospects will be in court. But if the RIPE charter provides for obtaining addresses only for LIR, I don't really understand how the address space can be transferred to you for use. Follow the procedures necessary to participate in the address management community and then (maybe) you can manage them yourself. Of course, if in your case, there are grounds for transferring this address space to you. ---- Dmitry Serbulov
Dear,
we are the sponsoring LIR of a company that has a claim against a RIPE member in Germany. This claim was confirmed by court judgment through an enforcement order. As part of the compulsory enforcement, there is a garnishment and transfer order instructing RIPE to transfer the members IP addresses.
However, RIPE refuses to comply and comes up with all sorts of ideas, e.g. that the creditor should first become a RIPE member, or that the whole matter must first be served to RIPE by a Dutch court, etc. Obviously, RIPE does not seem to care much about applicable EU law and legal proceedings.
The lawyer now recommends suing RIPE, since they are not complying with the garnishment order, thereby making themselves liable for damages, and should then directly pay the claim against the RIPE member instead of releasing the IP addresses.
That would, of course, be even easier, since nobody would have to deal with the sale of the IPs, etc.
Has anyone here ever had any experience with this? Or perhaps an idea how to get RIPE to act in compliance with the law?
-- Mit freundlichen Grüssen
Thomas Czarnetzki ------------------------------------------------- comtrance - your communication entrance
E-Mail: t.czarnetzki@comtrance.net Internet: http://www.comtrance.net Telefon: +49 (211) 271 59 - 20 Fax: +49 (211) 271 59 - 21
Notfall-Support (24/7): +49 (211) 271 59 - 15
Unternehmenssitz: comtrance service GmbH | In der Steele 35 | 40599 Düsseldorf Handelsregister: AG Düsseldorf / HRB 96082 | Ust-ID: DE-349229353 | Geschäftsführer: Thomas Czarnetzki
Alle unsere Leistungen erfolgen ausschließlich auf Basis unserer Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen.
To unsubscribe or manage your subscription, log in to the LIR Portal with your RIPE NCC Access account and go to the LIR Account page: https://my.ripe.net/#/account-details.
Scroll down to Membership Mailing Lists to update your 'members-discuss' subscription.
Having issues unsubscribing? More information about managing your subscription can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/s/members-discuss-subscription-options/
participants (6)
-
Denys Fedoryshchenko -
Franco Tauceri -
Kaj Niemi -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
sdy＠a-n-t.ru -
Thomas Czarnetzki