<html><head></head><body><div><div><div class=""><div class=""><div class=""><div class=""><br></div></div><br><div class="sh-signature"><div class="gmail_signature"><br></div></div></div><br><div class="sh-quoted-content"><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 5:34 PM, denis walker <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:db-wg@ripe.net" target="_blank" class="">db-wg@ripe.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><p class="">Hi Randy, Sylvain <br></p><p class=""> IANAL either but I understood the main legal issue was that there is no defined purpose to use the RIPE Database for geolocation services. So whatever is in that referenced file is not covered by a valid purpose. We have had the "geoloc:" attribute for a long time. The value of this attribute is similar to the data contained in this file. So if that data was the problem we would already have a problem without "geofeed:". <br></p><p class=""> Maybe we can cover all this with an appropriate purpose. Suppose we defined it in this way: <br></p><p class=""> "Providing geolocation information related to Internet number resources in a format defined by current IETF specifications." <br></p><p class=""> This covers having a referenced file as long as the content of that file is as defined in the IETF specs.<br></p></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Seeing as the concerns seem to be legal, and NOUAALNDWPTOTV (None Of Us Are Actual Lawyers Nor Do We Play Them On TeleVision), I suspect that we need some input from the lawyers.<br></div><div><br></div><div>If we ask "Would adding 'Providing geolocation information related to Internet number resources in a format defined by current IETF specifications.' alleviate your concerns?" and they nod happily, then job done… ?<br></div><div>W</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class=""><div class="sh-quoted-content"><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><p class=""> <br></p><p class=""> cheers <br> denis <br> co-chair DB-WG </p><p class=""> On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 20:20, Randy Bush via db-wg <<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="mailto:db-wg@ripe.net" class="">db-wg@<wbr>ripe.<wbr>net</a>> wrote: <br></p><blockquote class=""><p class=""> IANAL and try not to play one on the net. but ... <br></p><p class=""> my reading of why NCC legal has problems with the geofeed: attribute is that they see the NCC as legally liable for the content of the geofeed data file to which it points. <br></p><p class=""> this concern may be based, for example, in the courts finding pirate bay liable for the content to which they pointed, and similar precident. <br></p><p class=""> so the question is not so much the purpose of the database, it is constraining the privacy exposing danger in the geofeed files. i think the authors of RFC 8805 could be of help here. <br></p><p class=""> but again, IANAL. for one, i charge less :) <br></p><p class=""> randy <br></p><p class=""> -- <br></p><p class=""> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://mailman.ripe.net/" class="">https:/<wbr>/<wbr>lists.<wbr>ripe.<wbr>net/<wbr>mailman/<wbr>listinfo/<wbr>db-wg</a> <br></p></blockquote><p class=""> -- <br></p><p class=""> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://mailman.ripe.net/" class="">https:/<wbr>/<wbr>lists.<wbr>ripe.<wbr>net/<wbr>mailman/<wbr>listinfo/<wbr>db-wg</a><br></p></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div><div><br></div></div><div></div></div></body></html>