nanog mailing list archives
Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation
From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 20:50:50 -0700
On 29/08/2021, Jay Hennigan <jay () west net> wrote:
On 8/29/21 11:42, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:It would seem reasonable to leave the whole issue up to the courts, instead of engaging in contempt of foreign courts, and to stop the vigilante justice against any of the parties, especially the end users who are not even a party to this whole dispute.The end users are an indirect party. Assume someone were in the business of stealing cars, forging their titles, and selling them to innocent third parties. A police officer pulling someone over for speeding might compare the VIN on the title to that on the car and discover that it was stolen. The stolen property would be returned to its owner and the end user purchaser would be out of luck other than having recourse against the thief. The same principle applies to someone who innocently accepts counterfeit money. If the Internet community as a whole or significant players therein were to treat these number resources as stolen property fraudulently obtained under false pretenses and stop routing those netblocks, the end users would indeed suffer just like the person who unwittingly bought a stolen car or accepted a counterfeit bill. The end user would pursue recourse against the party who rented or sold the fraudulently obtained netblocks and the business model of obtaining number resources under false pretenses solely to rent or resell at a profit would collapse.
But it is up to the courts to decide whether or not the property was obtained under false pretences. The situation is more akin to buying a car from an authorised dealer, and then the dealer having a dispute with the manufacturer, or the manufacturer having a dispute with a supplier. A business dispute doesn't suddenly make the item you have the title for to be stolen property, now does it? What you're advocating for is hiring a hitman to take care of the problem outside of the justice system, to take things by force which are not yours for the taking, just because you don't like the business authorised dealers are in. Please don't; the courts are already looking into the business dispute. Plus, you keep ignoring the fact that everyone else is already reselling IP address space from other RIRs, why is Cloud Innovation Ltd and AfriNIC space resale suddenly treated differently here? Please have some respect for the Mauritian court that's already handling this business dispute. It sounds like the whole situation with the asset freeze could have been avoided had AfriNIC not engaged in contempt of court to start with; surely having more contempt of court is not the solution here, now is it? C.
Current thread:
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation, (continued)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mehmet Akcin (Aug 28)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Masataka Ohta (Aug 28)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mike Hale (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Vincentz Petzholtz (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Noah (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Jay Hennigan (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Constantine A. Murenin (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Jay Hennigan (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Constantine A. Murenin (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Tom Beecher (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 29)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Rubens Kuhl (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Valerie Wittkop (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Valerie Wittkop (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Valerie Wittkop (Aug 30)