[anti-abuse-wg] Enabling community self-help?

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:52:01PM +0000, Vissers, Pepijn wrote:
> > > There's a difference between 'knowing' and 'suspecting'. And if a
> > company/person knowingly facilitates crime, it could be 'complicity'.
> > Under circumstances.
> > 
> > So "selling bread to criminals" is "facilitating crime"?
> 
> You pretend to miss the point. I won't feed. 

Actually I'm dead serious, and I suspect Suresh is missing the point.

I consider the original claim to be completely ridiculous, and I'm trying
to find analogies that make this obvious.

Or, let's phrase it differently.  What do you expect the RIPE NCC to *do* 
upon registration of a new LIR, if you all think that "check their company
registration papers with the company register to see that this is a 
company in good standing in their home country" is not enough?

Requiring the RIPE NCC to get a full police background check on the
persons listed as contact persons will cause a massive uproar - and
not solve anything either.  So: what should the NCC do, to avoid
being a "partner in crime"?

As long as a prospective LIR and their owners have not actually done
anything illegal (as in "have been convicted by proper legal processes" 
not in "Suresh doesn't like what they are doing"), it's a bit hard to 
find reasons in the legal framework of the EU to deny them membership 
and IP addresses.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 306 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20120329/e7008e3a/attachment.sig>