Comment: Anti Copyright and Anti Patent

(See in situ)

Anti Copyright and Anti Patent

I'm with Adam Kokesh, the constitution is wrong when it comes to copyrights and patents. Trademarks are a different thing, though. They fall under the category of standards, cousin to "weights and measures". If a group were to call themselves Microsoft, and I came along and called myself Microsoft in an attempt to misdirect users to my services, that would be fraud.

Perhaps one of the most notorious cases of a misdirecting domain name is Back in the 1990's, it was common to hear news reporters say, "For an official response on the Clinton - Lewinsky sex scandal, visit". Well, at the time, that was a porn site. The news reporters quickly came back to correct themselves, saying it's "". That, too, was a porn site. Because the sites weren't externally linked, they didn't even need to have "Are you over 18?" cover pages. Plus, I live in Winchester, VA, home of White House, an apple company over 100 years old. They ended up buying, even though most of their literature simply calls them "White House".

A prominent HVAC company in Winchester, L P Strosnyder, got into a dispute with Winchester Wireless, a company that was supposed to set up their website. The dispute ended with L P Strosnyder cancelling service. Anyone curious where goes now?

I don't know if Ron Paul has made any personal explanation as to why he wouldn't have accepted the "free offer" from the site owners, but I agree that he is within his rights, both legally and ethically, to gain ownership.

Michael Nystrom's fists can punch through FUD.