Ron Paul Found Guilty of ‘Reverse Domain Name Hijacking’

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#1
Ron Paul Found Guilty of ‘Reverse Domain Name Hijacking’

Leave a response
by RonPaul.com on May 23, 2013




Ron Paul committed “reverse domain name hijacking” when he sought control of the RonPaul.org domain name in bad faith, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has ruled.
Ron Paul had filed a cybersquatting complaint with WIPO in early February 2013, calling on the UN agency to confiscate RonPaul.org from a group of long-standing grassroots supporters.
This week, WIPO rejected Ron Paul’s complaint, asserting that the supporters were running a political fan-site and thus had legitimate rights to the domain name.
Ron Paul had originally registered RonPaul.org in 1999 but lost control of the domain name in August 2012 after failing to pay the annual renewal fee. His supporters quickly secured RonPaul.org to keep it in the Ron Paul community, and they offered the domain name to Ron Paul as a free gift in January 2013.
Instead of accepting the gift, Ron Paul filed a complaint with WIPO asking it to confiscate the domain name.
In his complaint, Ron Paul willfully misrepresented his supporters’ offer, alleging that they would give him RonPaul.org only if he paid them $250,000 for a different domain name, RonPaul.com. That claim was easily disproved by the letter Ron Paul submitted as evidence: his supporters’ offer clearly stated that RonPaul.org was a free, unconditional gift with no strings attached.
Ron Paul also wrongly alleged that his supporters had tried to sell him RonPaul.orgback in 2010, at a time when he still owned the domain himself.
After rejecting Ron Paul’s complaint, WIPO went on to assert that an attempt of “Reverse Domain Name Hijacking” had taken place:
Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Respondent has requested, based on the evidence presented, that the Panel make a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. In view of the unique facts of this case, in which the evidence demonstrates that Respondent offered to give the Domain Name to Complainant for no charge, with no strings attached, the Panel is inclined to agree. Instead of accepting the Domain Name, Complainant brought this proceeding. A finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking seems to this Panel to be appropriate in the circumstances.
Ron Paul’s supporters are puzzled as to why Ron Paul decided to use WIPO, a UN agency, in an attempt to confiscate the domain name instead of simply accepting it as a free gift. “We’re expecting to wake up any minute now and find out that this was all a big misunderstanding”, said Tim Martin of RonPaul.org.
The supporters at RonPaul.org are represented by Booth Sweet LLP of Cambridge, MA.

Download the Decision (PDF)
http://www.ronpaul.com/2013-05-23/ron-paul-found-guilty-of-reverse-domain-name-hijacking/
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
48,686
36,809
628
In a porn tree
#3
Maybe senility is setting in. I mean, the man always came across as half a loon, but lately he's just acting like a crazy old codger.

You kids! Get off my cyber lawn!
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,910
5,303
838
Wilmington, NC
#4
Ron Paul had originally registered RonPaul.org in 1999 but lost control of the domain name in August 2012 after failing to pay the annual renewal fee.
Sucks to be you, you crazy loony fuck.

Not to defend Paul, but something has bothered me about this story. I think we discussed it in the general Ron Paul thread way back. I recall there being some "language" in the Paul fan's agreement that made Paul think that they wanted to be paid...and that might've confused the ol' codger. Probably something like..."Yeeeeeah, ok....we agree to give Ron Paul the rights to the site and it's membership...EVEN THOUGH, we've done so much hard work with the site that...with it's membership and advertising, it's worth around $250K."

But honestly, not only do I not trust Ron Paul...but I also don't trust his moonbat fanboys. And if the site truly is worth upwards of $250K...it's hard to believe they would be willing to just give it up for free because Paul wants it back, even after forgetting to pay the domain bill. I would not be surprised to hear that his fans wanted at least something, and Paul refused and went to the UN (which brings this story to a whole 'nother level of ironic stupidity of Ron Paul) in an effort to essentially steal it back. You'd think a simple phone call would be enough to say, "Nonono...wait Ron...you don't need to file a complaint...we've already agreed to give it back to you at no charge".

I dunno...whatever the case, I just hope his son, Rand, stays the hell away from him and doesn't start giving him political "pointers" and advice.
 

Ballbuster1

In The Danger Zone...
Wackbag Staff
Aug 26, 2002
103,084
16,688
839
Your house, behind the couch
#5
So he failed to pay for the name and lost it.

Fans bought it to keep it going.

They offered it to him for free.

He says they tried to sell it to him but back
when he still owned it.

Then he tried to sue them after they offered
to give it to him.

This story is stupid.
 

nikoloslvy

I wear my sunglasses at night...Anyone want fries?
Donator
May 5, 2003
4,937
121
753
#6
Maybe senility is setting in. I mean, the man always came across as half a loon, but lately he's just acting like a crazy old codger.

You kids! Get off my cyber lawn!
I dont think he gets the internetz.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,162
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#8
So he failed to pay for the name and lost it.

Fans bought it to keep it going.

They offered it to him for free.

He says they tried to sell it to him but back
when he still owned it.

Then he tried to sue them after they offered
to give it to him.

This story is stupid.
You missed the part where the would-be savior of freedom ran to the fucking UN. In my mind, that's the best detail.
 

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#9
First, I don't really think the 77 year old Ron Paul is really on the front lines of running websites and paying for domain names, etc. He, as he has a habit of doing, probably let some idiot run it for him. Jesse Benton was his campaign manager and was a buffoon. It's probably some lackey that Benton hired that started all this shit.
Second, I tend to trust what the fan site says. If Ron Paul asked his fans to sell their homes and move to Texas, they probably would. Giving him a website is probably not that big of a deal.
 

CougarHunter

Lying causes cat piss smell.
Mar 2, 2006
10,590
2,570
566
KC Metro
#10
Well I find the WIPO guilty of having an acronym that sounds like a toilet paper brand.

Our findings have the same force of law.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#11
More importantly, how the fuck did a UN agency end up in charge of who gets domain names on the Internet?
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,162
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#12
More importantly, how the fuck did a UN agency end up in charge of who gets domain names on the Internet?
Just like with everything else, the UN is really in charge of it. The world basically just hands them a toy steering wheel and tells them that they're driving the car.
 

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
Jul 26, 2005
6,318
4,261
678
#14
The only good reverse domain name hijacker is a dead reverse domain name hijacker
 

the Streif

¡¡¡¡sıʞunɹɹɹɹɹɹɹℲ
Donator
Aug 25, 2002
15,168
5,985
861
In a hot tub having a snow ball fight.
#15
But honestly, not only do I not trust Ron Pau
I trust Ron Paul 100% more than I trust the current piece of shit that's in the White House.


The only good reverse domain name hijacker is a dead reverse domain name hijacker

They can have my domain name when they pry it from my cold dead server.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,162
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#16
But honestly, not only do I not trust Ron Paul...but I also don't trust his moonbat fanboys.
They just latched onto him because they like what he had to say. Their support wasn't based on his voting record or anything really substantive. It's a true cult of personality.
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,910
5,303
838
Wilmington, NC
#18
They just latched onto him because they like what he had to say. Their support wasn't based on his voting record or anything really substantive. It's a true cult of personality.

Best part about all of that was when his fanboys would go around posting that pic of the candidate's houses and showed Ron Paul had just a little tiny 1,300 sq ft, 40-year old ranch and all of the other candidates had multiple properties and mega-mansions. Yet, when you dig a little deeper (what Paulbots never seemed to be good at doing), you find out that he indeed, did own multiple properties and homes...including a huge plot of land where it appeared he was building homes for his family. He's as much of a phony as Obama and alot of these other politicians.

I trust Ron Paul 100% more than I trust the current piece of shit that's in the White House.
Still, to me, it's like comparing horseshit and dogshit. As is the case with alot of these politicians.