The Bogosity Forum

General Bogosity => General Discussion => Topic started by: FSBlueApocalypse on February 08, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Title: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: FSBlueApocalypse on February 08, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

So a guy who made his political career advocating against state intervention is now using state intervention when he can't get a website domain

http://www.ronpaul.com/2013-02-08/ron-paul-vs-ronpaul-com/ (http://www.ronpaul.com/2013-02-08/ron-paul-vs-ronpaul-com/)
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: MrBogosity on February 09, 2013, 07:37:47 AM
I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, I hate state intervention to turn over domain names; on the other hand, it IS Ron Paul's name and he deserves to have his domain namesake. If it were something like fuckronpaul.com or even isupportronpaul.com I'd be against it, but just ronpaul.com?
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: FSBlueApocalypse on February 09, 2013, 12:29:53 PM
What I don't get is, why is he doing this now? The fact that he let the site slide through his entire campaign is fishy.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: tnu on February 09, 2013, 01:43:39 PM
Assuming the current owner of t he domain acquired it legitimately. It doesn't seem like Paul has any case and seems really hypocritical. 
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: Ibrahim90 on February 09, 2013, 04:38:35 PM
What I don't get is, why is he doing this now? The fact that he let the site slide through his entire campaign is fishy.

the reason should become immediately obvious: money. during the run he had, it made money for him to use in the campaigns. Now that he's retired, it has in its current form served its purpose, and outlived it. yet it still has great money making potential.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: Goaticus on February 11, 2013, 07:46:30 PM
Assuming the current owner of t he domain acquired it legitimately. It doesn't seem like Paul has any case and seems really hypocritical.

It also seems that no matter what happens whoever owns the website is boned. Either Ron Paul wins without making himself look bad, or he ends up making himself look ridiculous in the attempt and the tribute site suffers as a result.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: VectorM on February 12, 2013, 10:33:48 AM
Are we sure this is even Ron Paul himself and not his legal team, or something of that sort? This might be something like that newsletter garbage.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: FSBlueApocalypse on February 12, 2013, 02:10:13 PM
This comment sums up the Ron Paul cult

"You bunch of Judases. How can any of you match what Ron Paul has done and given us . To judge him and crucify him because he hasn’t met your expectations of him is shameful ,pettty and and distrutive to the cause. Stop this now and give him the site. I would give my blood if he asked and you can’t even give him his name without 30 pieces of silver. "

Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: MrBogosity on February 13, 2013, 06:14:20 PM
Okay, after reading more about this here there and thither, I've had a lot of my questions answered:

My first one was, what the hell does the UN have to do with it? Answer: NOTHING. Ron Paul has NOT appealed to the UN or any state, and has not brought any lawsuit forward. He has contacted ICANN--the private organization that manages domain names and IP addresses--to get the admins of RonPaul.com to conform to the agreement they made--that anyone makes--when registering a domain, namely, not to make money off of someone else's identity.

Again, no state action is being taken, no lawsuit is being filed, and the UN has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it. Just a basic cybersquatting dispute with ICANN.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: AnCap Dave on February 13, 2013, 06:15:46 PM
Okay, after reading more about this here there and thither, I've had a lot of my questions answered:

My first one was, what the hell does the UN have to do with it? Answer: NOTHING. Ron Paul has NOT appealed to the UN or any state, and has not brought any lawsuit forward. He has contacted ICANN--the private organization that manages domain names and IP addresses--to get the admins of RonPaul.com to conform to the agreement they made--that anyone makes--when registering a domain, namely, not to make money off of someone else's identity.

Again, no state action is being taken, no lawsuit is being filed, and the UN has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it. Just a basic cybersquatting dispute with ICANN.

Yeah, was just about to post Lew Rockwell's response (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/132275.html), which basically goes into this.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: MrBogosity on February 13, 2013, 07:30:57 PM
Yeah, was just about to post Lew Rockwell's response (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/132275.html), which basically goes into this.

Cool, all the info in one place! Thanks! Just what I was looking for.

Here's ICANN's dispute resolution policy: http://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/policy

According to Paragraph 4(c), one of the criteria that will "demonstrate your rights or legitimate interests to the domain name" is:

Quote
(ii) you (as an individual, business, or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights;

Looks like it's a legitimate complaint. And this is, after all, a DRO, something the an-caps keep advocating.
Title: Re: Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com
Post by: libertarian__revolution on January 15, 2016, 05:18:24 PM
Somewhat related to this is this article claiming that Ron Paul has 10 racist friends including Lew Rockwell and Thomas Dilorenzo. They claim Dilorenzo is racist, OF COURSE, because of his book The Real Lincoln, and they even call him a neo-Confederate. STOP WITH THE ZOMBIE WORDS!!