You've deprived everyone else of the use of that block of IP addresses
in violation with your contract with ARIN which requires disclosure.
Then, based on the claim that block is in use and properly registered,
you've acquired additional blocks from ARIN, depriving everyone else
of their use as well. You've deprived ARIN of the ability to audit
your consumption of addresses without first notifying you. You've
muddied the waters between clearly legitimate and clearly illegitimate
use, damaging ARIN's tools and processes for detecting others' fraud.
You've made it costlier for the antivirus folks to contact the
infected. You've made it costlier for law enforcement to localize
offenders and damaged their ability to keep investigations secret.
Shall I go on? Regardless of what you may think about whether those
injured folks should be entitled to the information, the fact is that
they are entitled to it under ARIN policy developed based on public
consensus. Which means you injure them by denying it. Which when
denied deceptively (by quietly redacting information as opposed to
repudiating the contract that requires its disclosure with the
specific intent of depriving the entitled of that information) rises
to the definition of fraud.
BTW, I apologize for my prior comments about trolling. Reviewing the
thread, I think I read some intent into your words that wasn't there.
Nevertheless, I think we've reached the end of what can be usefully
said on the subject of "is redacting business SWIP information fraud
or something that's close to but not quite fraud."
Regards,
Bill Herrin