-35 votes

Ron Paul Calls on United Nations (Which He Doesn’t Believe In) to Confiscate RonPaul.Com?

I really need to hear Dr. Pauls side of this and soon....

Ron Paul Calls on United Nations (Which He Doesn’t Believe In) to Confiscate RonPaul.Com

In 2008, a group of Ron Paul supporters founded RonPaul.com, a Ron Paul fan-site that became one of the leading sources for information about and support for the perennial Libertarian presidential candidate. The creators of the site "put our lives on hold and invested 5 years of hard work into Ron Paul, RonPaul.com and Ron Paul 2012." His presidential campaign fell short, but the enthusiasm lived on as supporters continued to rally around this free enterprise Messiah.

Yesterday morning, Ron Paul repaid their support by filing a complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organization, an agency of Paul's much-reviled United Nations, seeking the expropriation of both RonPaul.com and RonPaul.org from his supporters without any compensation.

The editors of RonPaul.com explained the situation,

read here:
http://gawker.com/5983066/ron-paul-calls-on-united-nations-w...




Comment viewing options

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

This really reminds me of

This really reminds me of Obama's famous quote "you didn't build that". To strip the people of their rights that built that site, developed the merchandise, and put their time and effort into it is wrong. I understand that it is all under Ron Paul's name. But they put in the work. Not Ron Paul or any of his staff. Sure Ron Paul has a right to the property, since it's his name and fame that give it value; but the people that started that business have a right to it as well. I think worse case scenario they should owe back royalties or something. But that is THEIR site, Ron Paul's name or otherwise, THEY built that.

If ignorance is bliss, Washington DC must be heaven.

You're talking about the

You're talking about the website, Ron Paul's not asking for that. He's asking for the domain name.

So the domain name is

So the domain name is ronpaul.com right? so if he gets the domain name, the people will still have to change the name of the site. This will put a huge burden on them to change urls, links, etc. I just don't think it's right to take all that they've done and give it to RP. They should be compensated. 250K is a bit much, I'll admit, but how many people do they have working for them that will be out of a job? How much equity do they have in it? 250K might not be that far of a stretch. Or, as i said before, give RP a royalty. There's a win/win situation somewhere.

If ignorance is bliss, Washington DC must be heaven.

Regarding the work involved

Regarding the work involved (being a professional web developer myself) it would take about 10 seconds to do a mass find and replace on the code to replace www.ronpaul.com links with www.newdomainhere.com links.

Then of course, you'd need to change the banner in photoshop, which might take you another 45 seconds.

Ideally, it would take them a minute to update the site. Yes, you'll still have to update the URL that your online merchant is processing for, change the name servers for the domain, and some other updates, but they are all SUPER quick and SUPER easy. There's really no huge burden.



"Or, as i said before, give RP a royalty"

Exactly, which alludes to the point that if anything, they owe Ron Paul money, not vice versa. He should be suing them for profiting off of his trademark without his consent, but he's not. He's just asking for the domain name.

It's not

the site that RP's after, as you said the current owners of ronpaul.com did "build that", rather RP's claiming that the name "Ron Paul" is sufficiently distinctive enough and has been associated with Ron Paul the politician, author, political commentary enough to have earned him a trademark for the name "Ron Paul", and that the domain name "ronpaul.com" is part of his trademark, which I agree.

The site can move to another domain name but let's be honest: people go there because it says "Ron Paul" not because he's offering a distinctive service so I think Dr. Paul will w1n no problem IF it is established that RON PAUL has earned his trademark, which IMO he did.

Again this is not about the site, the owners "DID BUILD THAT" and they can keep it, this is about the name Ron Paul which "Ron Paul BUILT THAT".

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

True

But the value of the asset is relative to available buyers who are willing to pay the price being asked.

Good luck trying to find one at the asking price of $250,000

This seems like a job for

This seems like a job for ICANN... Why is Ron Paul going through a UN agency?

ICANN doesn't resolve

ICANN doesn't resolve disputes directly, they utilize "approved dispute providers". WIPO is one of them.

http://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/providers

IP issues aside... Just the

IP issues aside... Just the fact that they call themselves "Ron Paul supporters" and are trying to sell Ron Paul a domain name that cost them $10, for $250,000 - is pathetic.

And they are pretending that Ron Paul is taking their website content away, he's NOT. They will still have their website files and precious mailing list. Throwing up their website on a new domain name, like ronpaulmerchandise.com (example only), is as easy as clicking a button.

I would like to remind everyone..

That our Ron Paul is not the only man in the world with the name: Ron Paul.

What if another man named Ron Paul out bids our Ron for RonPaul.com?

:-))

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

Yes,

But our Ron Paul is the only man in the world with the name Ron Paul trademarked...

Intersting point....

Check out points 3 and 5.

3. Another Ron Paul from UK could protect their name in another country.

5. According to this .. Doesn't look like the original owners infringed the trademark.

Source: www.trademarkmyname.com

1. Should I have a search done?
If you are using a trademark over a broad market (such as the Internet) or are concerned about competitors, it is advisable to perform a trademark search. The "perfect" business name for your company may be too perfect - it may already be taken. If you are going to invest time and money in creating a brand name and developing the marketing materials to promote your product or service, the costs of a name change could be staggering -- much more than the cost of a trademark search. It is therefore important to perform a trademark search prior to any promotional activities

2. How long does a trademark last?
Trademark rights can last indefinitely, so long as the owner continues to use and renew the mark. Federal trademark law requires that between the fifth and sixth year after the date of initial registration, the trademark registrant must file further documents in order to maintain the registration. A renewal must then be filed every ten years.

3. Can foreign applicants register a trademark?
Applicants not living in the United States must designate in writing the name and address of a representative within the United States. A U.S. registration provides protection only in the United States and its territories. If the owner of a mark wants protection in other countries, the owner must seek protection in each country separately. TrademarkMyName.com can assist you in filing such foreign trademark applications.

4. Are there any additional costs?
There is a government filing fee of $325 per class of goods or services with any trademark application in addition to any attorney costs to prepare the application. Depending upon the type of application filed (whether based on actual use or an intent to use) there may be some additional government fees required prior to registration. There are also additional government fees required for maintaining and renewing a registration.

5. What is trademark infringement?
Trademark infringement occurs when someone uses the same or similar name in commerce in a way that may lead to confusion with the trademark owner's service/product. In general, infringement does not require the infringer to be a competitor, but infringement does require a similar or related product. What constitutes a trademark infringement is highly fact-specific. Please contact us to discuss any actions you believe to be infringement or if anyone has claimed infringement by you.

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

None of those points are

None of those points are applicable. Ron has no trademark on his name. This is a legal issue, not a personal or moral one. Also, there is no trademark owned or applied for on RonPaul.com (unlike Amazon.com for example), however the use of the URL uncontested over many years is a strong legal position to be in.

Then so be it

But I doubt the supply of Ron Pauls in the world, who are ready to shell out 250,000 for a URL is very low

So?

Just because you doubt that there are any Ron Paul's out there that aren't willing to shell out 250k doesn't mean that there arent any..

Your doubts don't mean squat

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

I guess you are correct

That being said I bet you will spend more than 250,000 to find your buyer

good luck with that

If its that important to me ...

Maybe I will.

What's it to you?

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

RicheyG, is appears by the tone of your replies...

That you have a horse in this race.

From an outsiders point of view, you stand to lose this battle - hands down.
Not because of WIPA or ICANN, that is just political posturing, being used as leverage. The value will surely drop because the longer this dispute goes on, the less valuable the URL purchase becomes. - I mean who else is going to come in and bid up the price?
Also if the new buyer would have the potential threat over their head as well... why would they buy at a premium, with that risk?

If you are in fact involved in this dispute, why not make an offer to outsource and manage the web store for whatever the good Dr. has coming down the pipe. Just follow their design & marketing guidelines and get your cut.

That would be a long term management contract, that most developers would love to have in their portfolio.

That would be a win / win as far as I can see

Sometimes I come off as a rude person..

I did not intend to be that way.

Im not in any race - nor do i have a horse in one.

I'm not involved in this dispute either.

I'm simply stating that your doubts that Someone out there would shell out 250 k + for this site is .. Baseless.

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

Thank you for the Reply RicheyG

I did not think of you as rude, it just appeared that you were taking replies personally

FYI:I have been a web developer for many years now, and the issues of URL purchases come up frequently.
Each time my clients ask, how much to buy the URL from the current owner, and how much to get a work around

Never in my years has the client jumped at the buy out price as it is always more cost effective to do a work around.

This case however, is unique due to the circumstances, and I believe that the 50,000 offered by the Paul camp is fair to say the least.

But if the owners really do want money, then they are in an excellent bargaining space to offer to manage and operate the web store as it is up and running and all that would be required would be a new graphic interface, which can be easily applied.

I am sure they could get the 250,000+ if they played ball with the good Dr. as opposed to being a hurdle to the inevitable outcome of Dr. Paul selling merchandise with his name/image on it.

Keep in mind that ...

The initial asking price was over $800,000.

The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.

- Calvin Coolidge

In the free marketplace

owners of property have the freedom to loose on investments as well.
I believe that the vast majority of RP supporters will no longer buy products from the ronpaul.com site, until it is sold to the man himself... I know I for one will not support the site anymore. In addition their valuation seems to incorporate the whole business, not the URL itself which makes no sense.

They can easily move their operation to a new domain

As a web developer, I believe that Dr. Paul, offered more than a fair price, and the current owners want to squeeze more of of him.

It is clear that the owners are short sighted, as the longer they hold out, the less valuable the URL becomes, to an eventual tipping point.

IMO, the best bet would be to work with the RP guys and outsource their web store to the ronpaul.com guys and then everybody wins 8)
Beyond that, if they are true fans, then they should try to work together as opposed to working against, as it appears to those on the outside.

The "true fan" argument has no place in a business discussion

I'm in favor of a free market solution, which has been hugely undercut by the legal action.

I am by no means getting involved in their private negotiations

I can, though, as a consumer, let the operator know that I am unhappy about their business practices, and tell the world about it.. Which I am doing.

I hope that the current owner(s) read these posts, realize the err of their ways and come to a fair settlement quickly.

If they do not I will advocate for the the boycott of the ronpaul.com site, as will many others... Not to mention be vocal about it.

Ron Paul is right here....

sadly, the average American doesn't understand intellectual property and will always side with the violator. My favorite basketball team, the Clippers, learned this the hard way when they asked one of their biggest fans (who they had given free tickets for life to) to stop selling bootleg merchandise that infringed on their IP and he literally went crying to the media.

The fact is, I'd say Ron Paul has a right to his own name and certainly doesn't deserve to have bootleg merchandise with his name on it sold without his express permission. That's the issue here if I'm reading this correctly: they didn't get permission.

I don't play, I commission the league.

ron paul doesnt own his name.

ron paul doesnt own his name. there are a lot of people with the name ron paul. Nobody owns words

do you agree that RP's stance

do you agree that RP's stance is necessarily hinged on RP's belief in IP?

ie: agreeing with RP is only possible to the extent that one agrees with IP. And also that based on RP's actions we can safely assume that he agrees with IP?

I would think he agrees with IP....

after all, liberty is not possible without property rights.

I don't play, I commission the league.

that wasnt my question. Do

that wasnt my question.

Do you think that RP's stance necessitates IP support?

Or is it possible to view RP in the right here even if one doesn't believe in IP?

Not really sure...

how a libertarian can not believe in IP.

I don't play, I commission the league.