The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: facebook posting under Jack Hunter's message of this topic

(See in situ)

facebook posting under Jack Hunter's message of this topic

by 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 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.