RE: Exodus "locking down" customer gear due to bankruptcy?

From: Cristopher Daniluk (no email)
Date: Tue Oct 02 2001 - 22:04:44 EDT


[snip]

> My former employer had to negotiate an
> agreement with
> his landlord in order to offer colo services because colo providers
> effectively are subletting space.
>

Yep. Another weird implication of this is that putting leased
equipment in a colo facility technically requires some special
attention to ensure property insurance requirements are met.
We had a problem with that before where the particular leasor
had never dealt with colocation situations before and thought
it was "insane" we were putting our equipment on someone else's
property.

> But assuming I'm paid up per the terms of the colo contract, can the
> bankruptcy court or their agent take my servers because my
> landlord went
> bankrupt with X number of months left on my contract?
>
Nope. If the landlord defaults in a manner where they will suspend
operations, they're failing to fulfill the terms of the contract and
thus, as a tenant, you can't be liable for an amount larger than
your current balance. At least, not as a general rule :)

> Every lease I've signed, whether for an apartment or office space,
> provides that I owe the landlord $X where $X is the product of monthly
> rent x contract term in months. So, I pay the balance down to zero but
> before the last month I still have an outstanding balance.
> But does that
> apply to colo contracts too?
>

Sure, but potential liens would only apply to past due balances. Unposted
balances that you're talking about aren't past due, so they couldn't
restrict your access on that basis to my knowledge.

> > If the state that the server is in has such legislation, that
> > equipment is essentially a substitutable asset in place of your
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^
Believe it or not, that is essentially










Hosted Email Solutions

Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD