[CRISP-TEAM] Possible inconsinstency pointed out on IRP for Section III A2 and IIIA3

[Alan Barrett]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2015, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
>Currently the rights are owned by the US government as stated in the
>NTIA contract. We want these data rights, along with the IPR to stay
>with the community. We need to articulate this and avoid contradictions.
>
>My suggestion is to include my previously proposed amendment in the IPR
>section instead:
>
>III.A.2. IPR related to the provision of the IANA services remains with
>the community:
>
>OLD:
>
>It is also the expectation of the Internet Number Community that
>non-public information related to the IANA number resource registries
>and corresponding services, including the provision of reverse DNS
>delegation in IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA, is managed by the IANA operator
>and will be transferred to its successor(s) along with relevant rights.
>
>NEW:
>
>It is also the expectation of the Internet Number Community that
>non-public information related to the IANA number resource registries
>and corresponding services, including the provision of reverse DNS
>delegation in IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA, is managed by the IANA operator
>and will be transferred to its successor(s). All rights on non-public
>information related to the IANA number resource registries and
>corresponding services must be transferred to the RIRs.
>
>
>And we can stipulate the principle as simple as:
>
>Principle: the contract will implement the RIR community expectations as
>described in section III.A.2
>
>Does this resolve the contradiction, still retaining the important
>statement?

So, you propose to remove any reference to rights being 
transferred to a successor organization.  All rights will be in 
the public domain, or transferred to a neutral organization like 
the IETF Trust, or transferred to the RIRs.  No rights will remain 
with the operator, so there will be no need to transfer any rights 
to a successor.

I think that's reasonable.

--apb (Alan Barrett)