Comment: 1. Ron Paul has not

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: ICANN (see in situ)

1. Ron Paul has not

1. Ron Paul has not trademarked or service marked his name, nor has he retained the publicity rights to his name. If Ron Paul were to succeed on the merits of dispute #1, then Ron Paul could and should shut down every Ron Paul site (including the DailyPaul.com) that might compete or dilute his trademark, service mark, and publicity rights. (Obviously, no one associates the DailyPaul and its political discussions with Ron Paul from Anchorage, AK or Mobile, AL, so any internet traffic that the DailyPaul occupies is by definition diluting Ron Paul's own use and potential future use of his name, trademark, service mark, and publicity rights according to the argument you've made above.)

2. The current domain name owner clearly has rights and a legitimate interest in the domain name as he's using it to educate the public, publish media (articles, videos, books, etc), sell goods, generally promote a political philosophy, expedite and encourage citizen participation in government, etc. To say that the domain name owner has no legitimate interests in these pursuits simply because Ron Paul has left politics is absurd as libertarians worldwide (and others) clearly still identify with the "Ron Paul" movement.

3. The domain name was not registered in bad faith. It was registered to engage in exactly the type of behavior it is promoting. Likewise, the domain name owner is not "holding Dr. Paul hostage for payment" as you wrongly claim; instead, the domain name owner is actively estimating the value of the namespace property he has developed, maintained, and promoted for years and the effort, time, and expenses it would likely take to export that business and activism into another space where it will be equally visible and trafficked, if that's at all possible (probably not).

While I'd love for Ron Paul to own RonPaul.com, he has no chance at winning this case. His only chance is to overwhelm the domain name owner with legal fees so high that a settlement becomes a necessity, but it would be ethically despicable for Ron to do that.