[NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA StewardshipProposal: Final Call for Comments

Hans Petter Holen hph at oslo.net
Sat Jan 10 18:02:14 CET 2015


On 09.01.15 21.01, Richard Hill wrote:
> I am saying (1) that the community should review and take a position on all
> of the language of the new contract and (2) that the details of the
> arbitration clause and the choice of law clause are sufficiently significant
> that they should be included in the current document.
This sounds ideal, but my guess is that the collective competnece of 
international contract law is slighty below our collective competence of 
IP-addressing, routing and network technology in general.

The numbering community has established formal bodies to handle this, 
the RIR boards & management, which I trust will get appropriate legal 
advice.

I trust these bodies will handle this in the best interest of our community.

I also know a bit about contracts from my day-job, so I would prefer to 
have the contract under Norwegian law without arbitration or Swedish law 
with arbitration. I would avoid UK and US law for cost reasons. Geneva I 
do not have an opinion on - but it sounds expensive.

I am not sure if my professional experience on contracts should carry 
any significant weight in this discussion. I would rather leave this to 
the RIR staff for approval by their boards, which we have put in place 
for this purpose. Of course with appropriate community consultation.

The way I see your suggestions - arbitration is important to get right, 
but I do not see strong consensus  to micro manage this by the community 
at this stage.

-- 
Hans Petter Holen
Mobile +47 45 06 60 54 | hph at oslo.net | http://hph.oslo.net




More information about the ianaxfer mailing list