[governance] US v John Doe & Others [#RIRs #Botnets #IP Addresses #extraterritorial jurisdictional application]

[Daniel Kalchev]

On 28.11.11 07:21, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote:
>
> "Nortel, in bankruptcy, sells IPv4 address block for $7.5 million" .. 
> to Microsoft
>
> Nortel sold something they never paid for, to which they added no 
> value, and used to their advantage.
>

This is actually debatable. Say, you are holder of an right. You did not 
pay (or you have no memory), but you hold it. It has no use for you 
anymore. Someone else wants that same right and they are willing to pay. 
They can of course go the "right" way and pay even more money, but you 
both can strike deal that suits both sides. Where is the wrong here?

An example: In an not so developed area, you laid fiber optic cable, 
just few years ago. You paid the "passing right" of $1/meter. Just after 
that the area became developed and the "passing right" now costs 
$100/meter. AT&T came along and offered to buy your "rights" for $50/meter.

So, while IP addresses are not property, because they are just numbers, 
the right to be associated with these numbers is.

Daniel
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t