[anti-abuse-wg] New Abuse Information on RIPE NCC Website

In message <20130614081812.GB2504 at Space.Net>, 
Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:

>On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 04:22:38PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> Now the Internet itself in engaged in a great civil war, testing whether
>> any distributed any decentralized amalgam and association of communicating
>> but otherwise independent networks, each answerable to no law but their own,
>> can long endure.
>
>I challenge that "answerable to no law".
>
>We all are operating in the boundaries of the national legal system that
>governs where an entity is located (easier for national ISPs, might be
>interesting for international networks, but still, laws *do* govern and
>ISPs are answerable to them).

OK, two points:

First, you're right and perhaps I should have said no "common" law, which
holds sway in all parts of the RIPE region.

Second, I hope and believe that it is beyond question that some nations
within the RIPE region, either on paper or as a results of non-enforcement,
do have, in effect, essentially no law whatsoever that would or does govern
any uses or abuses of any network of computer networks or any parts or
portions thereof.  That lowest common denominator may suit the interests
of criminals.  It does less well as a basis for an organized cooperative
association bent on something other that the perpetration of crime.

>What people seem to overlook when looking across the great waters is that
>there's a large number of countries in europe, and each has their own legal
>system

I, for one, do not overlook this key fact.  And indeed, by stating it,
you are helping to make my case for me.  There are laws whose application
and jurisdiction are various nations and their inhabitants. There are no
laws whose jurisdiction is The Internet, save for those promulgated by
RIPE, ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC, AFRINIC, IANA, and ICANN, and at present those
laws say essentially nothing other than "Thou shalt not fail to pay, or
defraud thy applicable RiR out of any fees reasonably owed, on penalty
of forfeiture of any and all number resources registered."  Yes, there
are also numerous codifications of the clerical minutiae of seemingly
innumerable processes and procedures by which number resources are
allocated, deallocated, reallocated, reclaimed, and redistributed, but
as we know, none of these say word one about the nature, character, or
intent of the bits any member might or might not elect to send down the
wire, once applicable fees have been paid and connections established,
nor about any community sanctions that might be applied in the event of
behavior which, while possibly obeying all applicable national laws,
materially does damage to the relevant RiR community and/or other
members thereof.

>so whatever is illegal across all of the US might be legal in
>one of the non-US states around the world - and that's actually what makes
>defining "network abuse" *that stands up to law* in a RIPE-wide manner
>somewhat tricky.

Tricky it may be, however the time during which it might be viewed as
optional has passed.  History has killed it.


Regards,
rfg