12 votes

Claim: RonPaul.com asking $250,000 for domain, down from $800,000

Hey, Ron, Want Your Own Name?
Posted by Lew Rockwell

The other day, the nice young couple who registered LibertyPaul.com offered to give it to Ron. On the other hand, those who registered RonPaul.com are no longer asking more than $800,000. They've cut their price to $250,000. For his own name.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What about the DP?

I've read most of the related post here on the DP about Ron Paul vs Ron Paul.com as well as read about the dispute on other forum sites that jump for glee at the chance to belittle his name. I’m pretty sure that is not the case with Ron Paul.com or other Ron Paul liberty loving web sites which started for the sole reason to spread the message of Ron Paul. After all, it is not about Ron Paul but the message – Right?

I believe without the Ron Paul grassroots Ron Paul would not have been given a second look during the 2008 and the 2012 presidential campaigns.

Time after time I have changed my views about a stand/subject Ron Paul took on one issue or another solely because of the grassroots websites and I have come to understand most of the time, after thinking about it more, I will agree with the good doctor and his message.

But I’m having a hard time with this one. Did Ron Paul go to Ron Paul.com and ask to get the domain name in order for him to have control of the site or did they go to him and ask him to pay? Is he going to continue the disputed sites in order to spread the message by himself? Is he after the money the sites produce or is it only because he does not want to pay big dollars to get control of the sites with his name?

I really don’t understand why this is happening and I’m really confused about why Ron Paul is doing this but I’m pretty sure if Ron Paul himself explained the why – I would probably agree with him.

One last question: Will Ron Paul also go after Michael Nystrom’s Daily Paul? – after all this is the best Ron Paul grassroots site – thanks Michael - it's worth millions.

I don't think RP would go after the Daily Paul

because it isn't his name and Michael Nystrom hasn't tried to sell it to him. I thought at first that RP approached the owners of RonPaul.com with a price, but now I'm hearing that he never approached them at all...that they approached him in an attempt to sell the domain name to him, first for $800,000 and then again for $250,000. I'm not an expert in any of this, but apparently the domain owners violated cyber squatting laws when they tried to sell a domain to a well-known person whose name is the domain name and the website under the domain is clearly about the person they're trying to sell it to ... and the current owners are not and don't have a business named Ron Paul.

Michael Nystrom's picture

I didn't think he would go after RonPaul.com

So clearly, what we think is irrelevant.

Which is why I've retained legal counsel.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

nvm

I thought you said "ronpaul.com" ... but you said "dailypaul.com"

hehe :>

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Welcome to the free markets

that the whole point. people who come up with ideas "first" usually profit from it. if you owned Romney.com would you give it to him? for the right price maybe...

What free markets?

legal precedence is against domain squatting. Especially in the US.

Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d) (1999)

As a consumer you are protected from owning madonna.com, kevinspacey.com, and any word a giant corporation claims is associated with their business even if you register them. The Govt keeps you safe from yourself like that. :)

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

250k is still a pretty absurd price.

Why on earth would they even for a moment think that Ron Paul would consider shelling out that kind of money for a domain?

If you are selling anything, you want to have a price that attracts a customer, not one that sends them looking elsewhere.

If I am selling cans of peaches, would it be wise to price them at 100 dollars each?

Would you rather have a customer that pays 5 dollars for your can of peaches, or no customer at all asking 100 dollars?

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Michael Nystrom's picture

Absurd to who?

If Ron's new venture is going to make $25 million a year, this is a pittance. Just the cost of doing business.

Sure, new domains are $10 to register, but this one isn't available at that price. Ergo, you pay the market price.

This, understand, is not selling cans of peaches. There is one seller, and one buyer. (Maybe more, but unlikely at that price).

Understand that this is not a market. This is a game of poker.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

The point I'm trying to make...

Is that I cannot see Ron Paul paying that kind of money for the domain, and if I owned the domain I would rather settle for less than 250k than not sell it at all.

I don't think that price is likely to entice Dr. Paul to buy the domain.

Especially, when he is already looking for alternative domains.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Michael Nystrom's picture

I understand your point. Do you understand mine?

My counterpoint is that value is fundamentally subjective.

My point is to look at this devoid of emotion: In the long run, if you have something that that will help your business more than not having it, is it worth paying the price for it. Domains are like real estate on the World Wide Web, and the old adage still applies: "Location, location, location."

But I agree, I doubt Ron Paul will pay it either.

So, putting the histrionics and emotionalism of

  • They should give it to him, because he's Ron Paul
  • $250K is an absurd price

Aside, look at the numbers. That is really the only thing that should figure into the equation.

At what price does it make economic sense for both parties to strike a deal?

I find this debate both amusing and depressing.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

I absolutely understand subjective value...

My post is based on the fact that a very frugal Ron Paul is unlikely to value that domain more than he values $250k.

"They should give it to him, because he's Ron Paul "

I never said they should give it to him, I think you are confusing my intentions with the sentiments of other people commenting on here.

I was just giving my opinion that the price was to high to attract its intended customer.

"I find this debate both amusing and depressing."

I'm not even trying to debate you, I think you are seeing a disagreement, where a disagreement doesn't exist.

"But I agree, I doubt Ron Paul will pay it either."

That's the entirety of my comment.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

.

Obviously the ones who own RonPaul.com do not know Dr. Paul very well.
He would throw $250k in the garbage first before he would pay for that domain.
He would never pay one dime to register his domain and still has the first dime I ever sent him.
Dr. Paul is a frugal conservative and lives his life in this way~ He would consider it going against his values to pay for his own name to be registered.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

All this jabber about free markets and owning names is beside

the point. They offered it to him, made it sound like they would give it to him. Did they have a change of heart? Or when they said they had a "cordial message for Ron Paul" did they mean they smelled profit?
http://www.ronpaul.com/2013-01-11/statement-regarding-ronpau...

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

They didn't make it sound like anything.

You just read into it what you wanted to hear.

They said they had a "cordial message for Ron Paul."

I don't think I am the only one who would not have expected a "cordial" message to be "give us $800,000."

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

How will Ron Paul ever become

How will Ron Paul ever become known on the internet without ronpaul.com??? He better fork over the money before he dies in obscurity!

Exactly! :D

I seriously doubt Ron even wants his name as a domain. He's too humble for that and he keeps saying it's not about him...

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

You've

got to be kidding me. Ron Paul DOMINATES the Internet compared to other candidates. Probably more so even than Obama. There are tons of youtube videos, sites, and not to mention the most important thing, which is his fan/support base is highly web savvy. Any site he chooses to promote will become popular. Whether it's RonPaul.com or RonPaulxxxx.com. I seriously doubt Ron Paul will fade into obscurity.

I will concede, however, that having RonPaul.com is desirable. It would be the icing on the cake. But it doesn't have to go that direction, it can go another one. When I first heard the word "Google" I thought it was the stupidest sounding thing I ever heard.

Sarcasm

I believe he was being sarcastic.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Be consistant now

WTF? Really? You guys are mad that someone wants to make money? You say just give it away? For the common good? You guys surprise me. I wouldn't pay $250,000 for it and I doubt Ron Paul will either. This is a private business transaction, it has nothing to do with us. If they can make $250k off of it, good for them.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

free market just means no coercion from the government

u dumb fuck.. it doesn't mean no social pressure from people who call scammers as they see it.. practice freedom of speech all you want, just know there will be always a few drag into the back alleys and a good beating that police don't always catch

just like freedom of speech doesn't mean you can come into my house and cuss at my people.. why do you dumb idiots who don't really get libertarianism which is about governing principle, not how you practice your private life/morality, even bother staying in the movement? 8 years into this shit and you're still hearing people equate cussing at someone's face on his property to freedom of speech.. tired of you IQ60ers' shit.. to talk about this as a topic pertaining to the integrity of the free market is almost as stupid on the same level..

no one's saying he shouldn't charge and no one's launching legal actions, we're using social peer pressure which is perfectly fine and what you should do.. so wtf do you say to people who protest being charged 100 bucks for a box of milk when there's no shortage? that they are anti free market? fuck you..

A few things

First off, why are you attacking me? Swearing at me? I never pointed any finger at you individually. My post was the general attitude that somehow the owners of ronpaul.com had done something wrong.

100 bucks for milk? Sure I would protest, and I wouldn't buy it. But this ronpaul.com thing is quite different. It does not concern you and me. We have no interest or stake in it besides a casual interest.

And to the other person, I never said anything about Free Markets. I never said anyone was against or for them. I simply said people saying ronpaul.com should be given away, or that they were somehow doing something wrong by trying to sell it are ridiculousness. Swear at me all you want, but I am still right.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

Show me

one comment in this thread inconsistent with free markets. A free market also means the right NOT to buy something.

I don't care if they asked for 30 million instead of $800,000 and now apparently $250,000. That's their right.

If this goes to court...

or INTERNIC arbitration then the legal precedence means that whoever is squatting on the domain will probably lose out resulting in either the domain being taken away or the amount of $$$ they are demanding is dramatically reduced.

The courts consider it "bad faith" to register a domain merely for the purpose of profiting from another parties well-known identity or trademark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Michael Nystrom's picture

Oh yes, take it to an international governing body

for arbitration. That would be classic. Sounds like something Jesse Benton would do, lol.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Yeah...

I don't see Ron pursuing it. Ron is not a huge fan of intellectual property and having the domain "ronpaul.com" is hardly necessary for Ron to have success with an internet strategy. Also, Ron and his giant humbleness he probably doesn't want his name as a domain. :p

The main sentiment behind my comment was how foolish and silly the owners of ronpaul.com are being and that at the end of the day nobody will care and they will probably still have the domain name but $0. :D

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

No

the owners of RonPaul.com are safe. They basically made a fan site out of that domain, which they are entitled to do. Cybersquatting involves misleading the public into thinking you represent the entity you don't, or else you don't do anything with the domain except try to profit from it.

Hmmm...

"Cybersquatting (also known as domain squatting), according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The cybersquatter then offers to sell the domain to the person or company who owns a trademark contained within the name at an inflated price.,/b>"

Some more points:

-- Legal rulings are often unpredictable
-- fansite domains have been taken away (madonna, kevin spacey, etc)
-- Although Ron Paul is aware of the domain neither he or one of his representative have pursued the domain. It is persons from ronpaul.com that have proffered an asking price so it is OBVIOUS that their intention is to make money off of Ron Paul's notoriety and fame. And the rapidly falling asking price is evidence that ronpaul.com is not making money and that they are trying to profit excessively.

I don't think Ron Paul would use the courts to pursue the domain. And I do not think the domain "ronpaul.com" is in any way necessary for Ron to achieve internet success towards his goal. It would only seem a bit narcissistic. Ron wants to promote liberty and small govt... not himself.

My point was that IF he were to pursue the domain name then legal precedence is in his favor.

Fansites have had their domains taken away. "Misleading" is not in the legal definition. Increased profits from a websites activity increases the chance the domain will be taken away because the legal definition specifically makes profits off the goodwill and fame of another part of the accusation. Poor profits with an inflated asking price for the domain is obvious in this instance. And even more "damning" is that the owners of ronpaul.com did the proffering while dramatically dropping the price after receiving no response (profit motive). They are gold digging....

Again, my point is legal precedence, not my opinion of what is right and wrong....

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Michael Nystrom's picture

I would agree with this point

.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Hey, today's

the Paul's 56th wedding anniversary.

Just GIVE IT TO THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlHN4NQxnK4&feature=youtu.be