[At-Large] US v John Doe 1 & Others [Defendants]

James S. Tyre jstyre at jstyre.com
Sat Nov 26 20:15:31 UTC 2011

> >> This is definitely not a situation where the US is attempting to
> >> directly order RIPE to do anything.
> >
> > I take it you've not read the Order.
> >
> > http://images.spaceref.com/news/2011/ProtectiveOrder.pdf
> I have.  I take it you haven't read RIPE's statements in which they say they're
> complying with Dutch police orders, not US courts.

I have, but you miss two points.

First, regardless of what RIPE says, the U.S. court order is clear on its face that it
attempts to be binding on all RIRs (as well as others).  I quoted the relevant portions of
the U.S. order, your statement about what the U.S. court is attempting to do is wrong.

Second, the Dutch police did not suddenly decide to act in a vacuum.  The Dutch police
received the Order from the U.S. court, then ordered RIPE-NCC to comply with the U.S.
court's order.  RIPE-NCC has raised questions about whether the Dutch police could do
that.  I'm not an expert on Dutch law, I express no opinion.  But the underlying issue
remains the same: can a U.S. court order (directly or indirectly), a non-U.S. RIR to
comply with the order?

James S. Tyre
Law Offices of James S. Tyre
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
Culver City, CA 90230-4969
jstyre at jstyre.com
Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation

More information about the At-Large mailing list