15 votes

said about Ron Paul's IP domain dispute, by a poster on facebook in regards to the alleged "UN" claim

Bryce Steinhoff: There's a lot of misinformation about this being spread around. Here's the deal:

The UN has no authority to strip a domain name from its owner. Ron Paul certainly knows this and that is not what any of this is about. I repeat, none of this is about the UN or their authority.

When anybody registers a domain name, they voluntarily agree to an ICANN policy called the Uniform Domain-name Dispute-resolution Policy, or UDRP. ICANN authorizes *several* entities to handle arbitration when a third party submits a claim based on the UDRP policy which the domain registrant voluntarily agreed to. In this case Ron Paul's lawyers choose WIPO, a UN agency. Certain criteria such as trademark rights and "bad faith" are outlined in the UDRP for evaluation by the arbiter, which are the things that Ron Paul's lawyers mention in their UDRP complaint.

In the case of RonPaul.com and .org, the registrants and registrars are outside the US (this is not necessarily the people who run the sites). Because of this, it is logical that Ron Paul's lawyers opted to use the UN-connected WIPO agency to do the arbitration. It is *incidentally* connected to the UN; it doesn't have anything to do with UN "authority".

You don't have to agree with Ron Paul on this as Jack pointed out, but don't cry NAP abuse when a provision of this voluntary contract is exercised. The arbitration can even be overturned by the courts if necessary, but that's unlikely.

comment posted under Jack Hunter's facebook update about the same topic http://www.facebook.com/jack.hunter.397/posts/298778630248015
------------

now my words: this is why i advise people like P.Au.L to avoid subtle jabs in his postings, especially when you are half-wit and quasi-informed and don't know wtf this "UN dispute" even means. on the flip side of the coin, you are the kind of guy that would vote for patriot act because of the title, if your belief system weren't here. same stupidity, different style. hopeless.

also interesting how it seems people like michael nystorm just wishes every instance of alleged 'hypocrisy' by ron paul becomes true. you guys are really troubled people, fiddling while rome burns.




Comment viewing options

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

I could care less about this

I could care less about this "issue" personally.

be creative instead of confrontational!

The 250K is a lot of money but there are other arrangements possible-- share advertisting revenue with original ronpaul.com owners for 10 years. ETc. Give a link to the new ronpaul.com site. Someone please be creative instead of confrontational!
In my opinion ronpaul.com should hold out for expenses to date and a small profit OR some kind of revenue sharing settlement. A profit is reasonable because Ron Paul must recognize that the site was used to add value to his name.

Thanks for reposting this, jtstellar

I've made similar comments on each thread I can find related to the domain issue. Just trying to offer a different and hopefully more accurate perspective.

Bump

Bump

I Second almost everything you said..

except this:

"also interesting how it seems people like michael nystorm just wishes every instance of alleged 'hypocrisy' by ron paul becomes true. you guys are really troubled people, fiddling while rome burns."

my2cents..

I was disappointed to see that the post you are making reference to by "P.Au.L" has been "mysteriously removed" when it already had many comments on it about this matter.

Anyway.. moving along..

www.youtube.com/truefictions

I try to change people every day. Do You?

It's not the UN, it's WIPO, a UN agency

kind of like saying that it depends what the definition of "is" is.

jstellar, what you seem to miss

is that Ron Paul just skipped the part where he negotiated in good faith directly with his supporters. And while I cannot speak for Nystrom, I know that I have personally had similar experiences with the man. I still respect him in many, many ways, but I have long since gotten over my "hero worship." Sorry if that bothers you, but to be honest, the hero worship stuff bothers me. I usually try to bite my tongue, but I also tend to speak my mind, so...

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

my main point and only point really, is to advance depth on

this topic. every time something allegedly bad happens within the campaign especially when it has to do with legislative language messy mumbo-jumbo, people jump up and down, panic like little children, instead of finding out what it's really all about. when this happened, you immediately get half a dozen threads one after another, and it turns out none has done any digging, it's all the internet echo chamber bull shit everyone is propagating theories with not one person bothering to spend 1 minute to know even what the heck they are talking about or at least wait until someone has one less lazy bone to do so, know more on the subject, before they proceed to whine

in regards to the more moral part of implication you put out, i would just conjecture, that we don't know what is true. ron paul is known for being a private person about his affairs, when he thinks he has said enough on the subject, he just closes himself and lets the storm settle. it has bothered me too in the past especially when my gossip bone was itching as well to find out more, but this is him, like it or hate it. the moral part is the least i am worried about, to the extent some misfortunes happened, i will conjecture again it is either miscommmunication or owner of ronpauldotcom acting in bad faith. you don't really know them, be frank about it.

finally someone

states the facts about the so-called "United Nations" claim. UDRP is filed with ICANN which is a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Not the UN! Personally I never used the site ronpaul.com and made donations and bought merchandise from the campaign website where all of the money would go to the campaign. Ronpaul.com seems to me an entity that has made money off of Ron Paul's name, image and work. They are continuing that by wanting $250k for the domain name, they themselves admit the site name is about money in that they have merchandise attached to the name. While they did contribute to the campaign they also made money from it. How would any of you feel if someone has been making money off of your name, image and work for years and then wants 250k so stop using your name. The fact is when they acquired the name they did so with the intent from the beginning to profit from it and now that the campaign is over an sales have died off they want a final payday and are willing to drag Dr.Paul's name through the mud with the ridiculous UN claim to get it.

The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it-Andrew Jackson

if you guys truly want to advance depth on this topic,

those with experience and knowledge (or someone who knows how to fucking google thank god) pose about possible alternatives. if domains are registered outside of the US, what other alternatives there are, and find out whether WIPO has further authority to overwrite US rulings. as the poster said, any arbitration by WIPO can be overturned by a US court, which means it doesn't infringe on US sovereignty. whether WIPO can do further reviews and overturn a US ruling again, i do not know. dig around if you're interested in this topic, do your part and not just sit around and gossip, i've done mine.

those who are poised to attack ron paul's credibility should put their own on the line equally is how i see it.

Why would you bring Nystrom's name into this?

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I think it was a valid point

Reading posts in the other thread, I held a similar opinion.

In a constant need to feel justified, he is always looking for evidence to support the steadfast belief that paul has to be taken off a pedestal. Something about 'cult of personality' and what not.

yes that bugged me too

from what i've read michael is a standup guy with nothing but good intentions regarding ron paul and the movement which admittedly is in something of a chaotic flux at the moment & IMO that's due to the neo con lites. nystrom might question something, but who but a zombie wouldn't ever do that.

Nystrom, from what I know and read, is a stand up guy.

But it is also how one uses words that are important.

Not only is opposition trying to fracture the movement, there are some here that may have that intent as well, for one reason or another.

Until facts and full understanding are on the table, I have no reason to judge Ron Paul, either way.

Josie The Outlaw http://www.josietheoutlaw.com/

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

we agree

on that.

& that works for us, but obviously people have strong opinions on this either way, and i see nothing wrong with them hashing it out. some will be proven wrong, others right. it's a forum for discussion. personally i don't find the issue a big deal but, i don't think attacking one on their views (right or wrong) helps matters.

I'm actually counting the seconds

When somebody posts another i hate jack hunter comment

here's an oldie but goodie

to dig while you're counting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6S43OLuUwU