On Sat, Apr 16, 2016, at 17:10, Jim Reid wrote:
On 16 Apr 2016, at 14:53, Dominik Nowacki <dominik@clouvider.co.uk> wrote:
And such LIR would sue who? Himself? RIPE NCC is not a government body, nor a private company. It's an organisation of members, and such a LIR would have to be a member with set voting rights. You can't really sue for policy changes because you don't like how other, equal members voted.
They’d start by suing the NCC for implementing a policy which has done harm to the LIR’s business. If they were vindictive, they’d also go after
Here we are in the FUD domain. I think we should not go that way.
the authors of the policy change, the individuals who supported that policy proposal and those who had a hand in making the consensus judgement.
I, as a proposer would not fear about that. Justice is complex in its own, international justice (neither of the proposers live in UK or NL) is even more complex.
action(s) would get the attention of governments and regulators. That would be Bad.
Regulators may end up acting in either direction (for or against).
decisions are made by consensus. NCC members get to vote for board candidates, the charging scheme and the organisation’s activity plan.
And in certain circumstances, on other things....