North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Can a Customer take their IP's with them? (Court says yes!)

  • From: Stephen J. Wilcox
  • Date: Tue Jun 29 17:41:25 2004

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Brad Passwaters wrote:

> 
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:07:32 +0100 (BST), Stephen J. Wilcox
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Hi James,
> >  i would agree except NAC seems to have done nothing unreasonable and are
> > executing cancellation clauses in there contract which are pretty standard. The
> > customer's had plenty of time to sort things and they have iether been unable to
> > or unwilling to move out in the lengthy period given.
> 
> How do you arrive at this conclusion? Did you read the filings? This is not
> the customers position. Since I have only the customers filings and the judges
> TRO online it maybe that NAC has counter claims of their own.  However

The customer's unhappy.. but I dont see anything bad going on here.. 

The customer's wording is sloppy for a legal doc and they have silly points
raised, like because nac wont accept payment by credit card they are forced to
pay off their outstanding balance hence having to pay twice (one to the card one
to nac) .. well duh .. thats how it works. Non-portability of IP space is well
known, sure, its hard work and I wouldnt wish to do it but its normal - right?

Yeah theyre upset, this story has history that we're not seeing and I'm sure for
that reason NAC are playing hard ball here. But I dont think wrt the question of
leaving NAC and the timescales and cancellation process involved that anything
illegal or unexpected is occuring.

> in that case both parties would have put forth reasonable postions and the I
> believe the standard then would be that the judge would have to look at the
> harm done to both parties.  In the case of the customer they present an at
> least passable case that this will cause them to be put out of business.  
> Thus the judge says, Ok you keep paying NAC what you were paying them and NAC
> you work with them to transtion NAC can certainly challenge the TRO as
> indicated in the document itself

Presumably the judge is unsure and doing what seems to be a sensible option.. 

I hope the customer is using the time well to do some renumbering pdq!

> > This too isnt uncommon and the usual thing that occurs at this point is the
> > customer negotiates with the supplier for an extension in service which they pay
> > for.
> 
> And they claim they did but that NAC did not negotiate in good faith. Also
> that as NAC has indicated a desire to purchase them may have reason not to
> negotiate in good faith.

Maybe, happens.. again dont know the history, not sure its important..

Steve