RE: [address-policy-wg] Fwd: selling ip:s? (kf)
why are we not allowed to sell ip address? i dont understand...please explain...thank you
Quote from ripe-152: "By themselves, these resources have no intrinsic value; their worth is only realised in conjunction with the provision of Internet access. Thus, while registries may charge for their administrative and technical services, they may not charge for name space or address space as such; no unit cost or price tag can be attached to a domain name or to an IP address, public or private. " See http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-152.html <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-152.html> for the full document. Regards. Mike Norris
Hi, On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:51:23AM -0000, Mike Norris wrote:
why are we not allowed to sell ip address? i dont understand...please explain...thank you
[...]
See http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-152.html <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-152.html> for the full document.
It's also worth noting that this document is being reviewed at the moment. If anyone wants to join the list they can do so from: <http://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-152bis> or, web archives of the archives are available at: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/ripe-152bis/index.html> Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC
Hi That RIPE quote is outdated. Document itself is dated "Date: 22 April 1996". Nowadays "value" cannot (or should not) be prescribed or declared, because as it stands, "value of a thing is what thing can bring". And clearly, IP numbers are very valuable comodity, if available. Legally, however, RIPE (or Internet community ?!) should clarify this "non selling position". That IP numbers cannot be OWNED, and therefore, since noone can claim ownership over certain IP number or IP range, noone is ENTITLED to SELL it, and noone is, therefore, able to buy it. Claiming that "IP numbers themselves" have "no intrinsic value" might be, under certain circumstances, misleading, since, if someone is able to prove othervise (say, "if I can earn money by selling and buying IP numbers/renges, then, hell, they DO have value, not only intrinsic but very real, and very tangible..) then he successfully (if a matter is referred to a court) might undermine current standing that "IP numbers have no intrinsic value". To put it bluntly, "we" should make sure that kind of behaviour (selling and/or trafficking with IP numbers) is treated the same way as selling anything that seller does not own in the first place. I presume, selling a real-estate that one does not own is a crime (fraud?!). At least it's a fraud in my country. Regards! Darko -- Mike Norris wrote:
why are we not allowed to sell ip address? i dont understand...please explain...thank you
Quote from ripe-152:
"By themselves, these resources have no intrinsic value; their worth is only realised in conjunction with the provision of Internet access. Thus, while registries may charge for their administrative and technical services, they may not charge for name space or address space as such; no unit cost or price tag can be attached to a domain name or to an IP address, public or private. "
See http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-152.html for the full document.
Regards.
Mike Norris
Hi, Darko Bulat, Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 11:30:52AM +0100 :
Hi
That RIPE quote is outdated. Document itself is dated "Date: 22 April 1996".
Nowadays "value" cannot (or should not) be prescribed or declared, because as it stands, "value of a thing is what thing can bring".
And clearly, IP numbers are very valuable comodity, if available.
IP addresses are clearly quite valuable, especially PI ones, not to mention the "allocated unspecified" ones, for obvious reasons. However, the community should definately do everything in it's power to make sure IP addresses are not, under any circumstances, sold. This kind of behaviour would undermine the basic structure of the Internet. I think that, at least in some countries, if this will be allowed, Internet access and especially Internet services, will be reserved only for the rich. This will effectively remove startups from the scene. Secondly, this will most probably create LIRs that have way to much address space on one hand and LIRs that don't have enough on the other... Namespace allocations must be determined by demonstrated need only, in my opinion.
Legally, however, RIPE (or Internet community ?!) should clarify this "non selling position".
That IP numbers cannot be OWNED, and therefore, since noone can claim ownership over certain IP number or IP range, noone is ENTITLED to SELL it, and noone is, therefore, able to buy it.
I second that.
Claiming that "IP numbers themselves" have "no intrinsic value" might be, under certain circumstances, misleading, since, if someone is able to prove othervise (say, "if I can earn money by selling and buying IP numbers/renges, then, hell, they DO have value, not only intrinsic but very real, and very tangible..) then he successfully (if a matter is referred to a court) might undermine current standing that "IP numbers have no intrinsic value".
To put it bluntly, "we" should make sure that kind of behaviour (selling and/or trafficking with IP numbers) is treated the same way as selling anything that seller does not own in the first place.
I agree. We should update and clearify this policy, not change it, as IP addresses are simply a technical aspect of connected a node to the Internet, not a commodity - they should not constitute an extra cost. -- Kristófer Sigurðsson Net- og kerfisdeild Nethönnun ehf.
Darko Bulat wrote:
That IP numbers cannot be OWNED, and therefore, since noone can claim ownership over certain IP number or IP range, noone is ENTITLED to SELL it, and noone is, therefore, able to buy it.
The word is here is "license" (or "licence" whichever). Except in a few cases, I understand licenses can be transferred between unrelated parties. I believe that trying to restrict this transfer (with or without fee) may be against anti-competition and unfair contract law in the EU - especially given the natural monopoly that RIPE has in its operating region. I am not a lawyer, I have just read (and probably misunderstood and misremembered) many computer law books. See words and phrases like "novation" or "company name change" for some starters... The important thing is to find a wording in the license agreement between RIPE and the first licensee that makes this transfer pointless. Maybe. Or that RIPE must have first option to acquire the license for a nominal 1 euro or something. rgds, -- Peter
participants (5)
-
Darko Bulat -
Kristofer Sigurdsson -
leo vegoda -
Mike Norris -
Peter Galbavy