[anti-abuse-wg] WHOIS (AS204224)

In message <CAF8DC1C-2538-4E45-B19E-50490CAA7D1A at gmail.com>, 
Fearghas Mckay <fearghas at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> On 7 Nov 2015, at 21:13, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
>wrote:
>>=20
>> P.S.  By a very strange coincidence, I was recently investigating one
>> particular spammed-for web site which, on its Terms and Conditions
>> page, made what seemed at the time to be a rather obscure refrence to
>> an equally obscure UK law.
>
>Incorrect - it is an English and Northern Irish law, not a UK law. It
>does not apply in Scotland

I stand corrected.  Thank you sir.

> and why it would apply to a Dutch company,
>the RIPE NCC in this case, is somewhat uncertain as well.

To be clear, I did not assert that the Act in question applied
to RIPE, nor to any other Dutch entity.

I only mentioned it because (a) the Wikipedia entry relating to
this goes into some lengthy... and interesting... discussion of
the various complexities introduced when third parties are named
in contracts and also because (b) in my experience, statues and
regulations found useful in one jurisdiction are often also
adopted in others, and thus, the Act in question may perhaps
have some sort of counterpart in Dutch law, even though that
might be radically different in both scope and implications.

If anyone here could in fact provide a summary of Dutch legislation
and/or jurisprudence applicable to contractual third parties,
that would be both helpful and illuminating at this juncture.

However in lieu of that, I feel compelled to (re-)assert that
which seems self-evident, i.e. that RIPE is indeed a third-party
beneficiary within all LIR/end-user contracts, and that it is
explicitly named as such therein.


Regards,
rfg