Ron Paul wants to have RonPaul.com.....BAD IDEA

[newbitech]

honestly, what is Ron Paul gonna do with it? Besides the fact that his name is public domain, he's not the only person with that name. The old adage, "is your name written on it" simply doesn't apply to internet domain names.

The fact that Ron Paul's name is resolving to an IP address controlled by an activist, and a very perceptive and motivated activist should make everyone happy. But I will also point out that Rom Paul's name resolves to many other IP addresses.

As was mentioned, Ron Paul Forums and Daily Paul are two of them. There is also Ron Paul FLix, Ron Paul facebook, Ron Paul twitter...etc etc.

What SHOULD be mutually important to everyone is that the IDEA is carried forward.

Lets face it, Ron Paul was a "nobody" before his name became popular on the internet. It was net savvy people like the owner of RonPaul.com and other RonPaul websites that created what I will call the Ron Paul world wide web.

His ideas were something tho. Somehow he was able to break through, again with the help of the Ron Paul Web and remind us all about this idea that we share. I know when i started reading about things Ron Paul had done in congress, things he was saying, that amazing truth started to bubble out from inside my core being.

Ron Paul isn't going to do anything special with that domain name. He wants it cause one of his family members asked him for control of it. That's what I believe.

I'd tell em no unless they gave me a really compelling reason to hand it over.

ESPECIALLY SINCE HE ALREADY LOST CONTROL OF IT ONCE. IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN!

 

[sailingaway]

honestly, what is Ron Paul gonna do with it? Besides the fact that his name is public domain, he's not the only person with that name. The old adage, "is your name written on it" simply doesn't apply to internet domain names.

The fact that Ron Paul's name is resolving to an IP address controlled by an activist, and a very perceptive and motivated activist should make everyone happy. But I will also point out that Rom Paul's name resolves to many other IP addresses.

As was mentioned, Ron Paul Forums and Daily Paul are two of them. There is also Ron Paul FLix, Ron Paul facebook, Ron Paul twitter...etc etc.

What SHOULD be mutually important to everyone is that the IDEA is carried forward.

Lets face it, Ron Paul was a "nobody" before his name became popular on the internet. It was net savvy people like the owner of RonPaul.com and other RonPaul websites that created what I will call the Ron Paul world wide web.

His ideas were something tho. Somehow he was able to break through, again with the help of the Ron Paul Web and remind us all about this idea that we share. I know when i started reading about things Ron Paul had done in congress, things he was saying, that amazing truth started to bubble out from inside my core being.

Ron Paul isn't going to do anything special with that domain name. He wants it cause one of his family members asked him for control of it. That's what I believe.

I'd tell em no unless they gave me a really compelling reason to hand it over.

ESPECIALLY SINCE HE ALREADY LOST CONTROL OF IT ONCE. IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN!

It is still a business he built and he is planning net programming, and needs it for his home page. I think a supporter should give him the .org one. I feel less strongly about .com because it is the guy's business, but .org was Ron's business. I think Ron did build his name, you couldn't make him viral without him being him. Try it with Mel Watt.

 

[newbitech]

It is still a business he built and he is planning net programming, and needs it for his home page. I think a supporter should give him the .org one. I feel less strongly about .com because it is the guy's business, but .org was Ron's business. I think Ron did build his name, you couldn't make him viral without him being him. Try it with Mel Watt.

he doesn't "need" it to build up. I can guarantee you that if he registered dopefiddlywhackawoobershotliopleg.com that he'd get just as much traffic as he would with RonPaul.com

 

[sailingaway]

he doesn't "need" it to build up. I can guarantee you that if he registered dopefiddlywhackawoobershotliopleg.com that he'd get just as much traffic as he would with RonPaul.com

media regularly said ronpaul.com was his web page in discussing him, driving traffic there, and more importantly NOT driving it to his actual web page. However, I think we can just agree to disagree on this one. I think Ron should have at least the .org one, and don't understand a hard core supporter not feeling that way.

 

[TNforPaul45]

You know i hate to bring this up, and Ron Paul is the last person to use the state to gain, but there are Cybersquatting Laws that prevent someone from "squatting" on a cyber domain that has the same name as a private and popular citizen. Ron could bump him under Cybersquatting if he wanted.

 

[Qdog]

I dont get why so much of the staff is incompetent/ uninspired. When I went to Iowa to help with the caucuses with Gage, I was at their headquarters to get assignments and such to help out. Out of the interactions that I had with the lower level staff, most were hard working, and acted like the future of the nation depended on their efforts that day. But there was a pretty large minority that acted like they would rather be anywhere else in the world than there. In fact there were even some that almost appeared to be trying to make it MORE difficult for volunteers to help!

I was pretty upset about this at the time, because they were so many of us busting our asses for no pay, because we believed in something, and then there were people like this "milking the clock". This is a sign of failure of the management of the campaign.

 

[Qdog]

Oh yeah, I was also pissed because at the after party, where we all gathered to hear the results, there was a long haired hippy looking dude who told me he didn't vote, because he didn;t want to miss the party! My head pretty much exploded when he told me that. Somehow I managed to turn around and walk away without saying anything though.

 

[fr33]

Everyone here talking about the owner of RonPaul.com and somehow suggesting it's not appropriate from him to profit using Ron Paul's image and likeness forgot two things.

First of all Ron Paul was a publicly elected official and as such his name and image are in the public domain....it is perfectly legal for you to profit from public domain...you can write a book about a publicly elected official like Obama, use his image and keep all profits and you don't owe a dime to Obama. That's the way I understand it, correct me if I am wrong.

Second, the owner of RonPaul.com is doing exactly the same as the owner of RonPaulForums.com....both are using Ron Paul's name and generating ad revenue or monetizing their websites thanks to him....so if you aren't too happy with the owner of RonPaul.com generating a profit, why aren't you upset about the owner of RonPaulForums.com getting ad revenue? and what about all the other Ron Paul websites like Daily Paul who are also monetizing their sites?

The cybersquatting laws say all of those sites you listed are liable to legal action if he chose to. Some businesses/people go after all of those but most only go after thename.com.

 

[newbitech]

The cybersquatting laws say all of those sites you listed are liable to legal action if he chose to. Some businesses/people go after all of those but most only go after thename.com.

you probably don't want to be quoted on this. I am no lawyer, but I have been part of an IP suit for trademark infringement with internet domain names at the core. It's not exactly the same, but the burden of proof is gonna be hard to overcome in this case for ANYONE named Ron Paul, much less the congressman.

Ron Paul is already on record that he is not likely to effect change through the courts.

Here is a homework assignment. What was Ron Paul's vote on this law? Get me that answer, and I won't ask you to build a cyber-squatting case

 

[angelatc]

It is still a business he built and he is planning net programming, and needs it for his home page. I think a supporter should give him the .org one. I feel less strongly about .com because it is the guy's business, but .org was Ron's business. I think Ron did build his name, you couldn't make him viral without him being him. Try it with Mel Watt.

HOw the hell did they manage to lose the .org?

Seriously, I have very little sympathy for the organization at this point if they accidentally allowed it to expire. I have a couple of domains that I wanted to let expire, and I got an insane amount of emails to remind me. They should be embarrassed to admit they lost it.

 

[fr33]

you probably don't want to be quoted on this. I am no lawyer, but I have been part of an IP suit for trademark infringement with internet domain names at the core. It's not exactly the same, but the burden of proof is gonna be hard to overcome in this case for ANYONE named Ron Paul, much less the congressman.

Ron Paul is already on record that he is not likely to effect change through the courts.

Here is a homework assignment. What was Ron Paul's vote on this law? Get me that answer, and I won't ask you to build a cyber-squatting case

I've been on the other end. I squatted a domain that was the name of a famous artist who was deceased. (thename.com) I was threatened to be sued for not only the domain but for all revenue I might have made from the domain, AND any damages that could be determined to have been made to the name brand. Scare tactics for sure but I have no doubt this would be a slam dunk case. Of course I'm not defending these laws. Of course Ron Paul won't do this or vote for this. I'm just saying it's a slam dunk case for anyone else that wanted to pursue it. Surely they could reach a deal.

 

[sailingaway]

HOw the hell did they manage to lose the .org?

Seriously, I have very little sympathy for the organization at this point if they accidentally allowed it to expire. I have a couple of domains that I wanted to let expire, and I got an insane amount of emails to remind me. They should be embarrassed to admit they lost it.

I doubt RON had any idea. I'm thinking someone thinking 'he'll be retired' thought it would be just fine.

See my suggestion we chip in for a singing messenger to take him a letter and resumes of competent people.

 

[angelatc]

You know i hate to bring this up, and Ron Paul is the last person to use the state to gain, but there are Cybersquatting Laws that prevent someone from "squatting" on a cyber domain that has the same name as a private and popular citizen. Ron could bump him under Cybersquatting if he wanted.

Again, I'm not sure if he could, because the name originally belonged to another Ron Paul, who sold it. At an auction, even. So unless you believe that the other Ron Paul had no right to sell his property to anybody who wanted it, then the case isn't a typical cybersquatting slam-dunk.

 

[sailingaway]

Again, I'm not sure if he could, because the name originally belonged to another Ron Paul, who sold it. At an auction, even. So unless you believe that the other Ron Paul had no right to sell his property to anybody who wanted it, then the case isn't a typical cybersquatting slam-dunk.

that wouldn't apply to the .org though.

But I don't think Ron is interested in taking that tack. But seriously, for RON PAUL to have 'Ron Paul's homepage' or some such....

I like 'RonPaulFever.com' Or Kathy's idea of RonPaulXXXXXXXRocks.com better. but I don't see him using either. Actually, I just thought of one I like better. Hm. Homepage is terminally lame, though.

 

[angelatc]

I've been on the other end. I squatted a domain that was the name of a famous artist who was deceased. (thename.com) I was threatened to be sued for not only the domain but for all revenue I might have made from the domain, AND any damages that could be determined to have been made to the name brand. Scare tactics for sure but I have no doubt this would be a slam dunk case. Of course I'm not defending these laws. Of course Ron Paul won't do this or vote for this. I'm just saying it's a slam dunk case for anyone else that wanted to pursue it. Surely they could reach a deal.

ANd where did you get the domain? Did the deceased artist sell it to you, or did someone with the same name as the deceased artist sell it to you? If not, your case is much different than this.

 

[angelatc]

that wouldn't apply to the .org though.

But I don't think Ron is interested in taking that tack. But seriously, for RON PAUL to have 'Ron Paul's homepage' or some such....

I like 'RonPaulFever.com' Or Kathy's idea of RonPaulFuckingRocks.com better. but I don't see him using either. Actually, I just thought of one I like better. Hm. Homepage is terminally lame, though.

No the .org is different. I really don't care that much, but ROn Paul spent 30 years in Washington DC. If he hasn't figured how to make a deal after all that time, then that's his problem. In the meantime, we should consider ourselves lucky that RonPaul.org isn't now pointing to The Blaze.


Ron's better off sticking to Facebook.

 

[SpreadOfLiberty]

ronpaulmd.com
ronaldpaul.com
ronepaul.com
officialronpaul.com
genuineronpaul.com
ronlibertypaul.com
ronfreedompaul.com

are available

 

[angelatc]

Looking at the Way Back Machine, the Campaign For Liberty seems awfully suspect in the .org debacle.

 

[jmdrake]

I understand your suggestion but I think Ron is better off owning what he builds just as I wouldn't want to build a house on someone else's land to get lawn service from the property owner.

No. You don't understand my suggestion. Ron would still own the content. And he won't "own" the domain name anyway nor will he "own" the web space unless he sets up his own web farm (he'll get far to many hits to handle his own needs with a single server) and even then he won't "own" the bandwidth, but he'll be leasing it from someone else. Ron could easily enter into a 99 year lease with the owner (really "current leaser") of RonPaul.com and be totally protected. He would be better off because the current leaser of RonPaul.com has shown himself more responsible for keeping websites up then the people Ron has hired directly.

 

[jmdrake]

HOw the hell did they manage to lose the .org?

Seriously, I have very little sympathy for the organization at this point if they accidentally allowed it to expire. I have a couple of domains that I wanted to let expire, and I got an insane amount of emails to remind me. They should be embarrassed to admit they lost it.

Yep. All this "The owner of ronpaul.com should give it - sell it - before forced out of it" talk is emotional garbeldegook. The Mises way is for Ron Paul to offer to lease it from the current owner under terms that Ron Paul control and own the content, the current owner (leaser really) is responsible to make sure it never expires and works for Ron Paul as a webmaster and internet consultant. That last part isn't even the most essential. The terms of the lease should allow Ron Paul to pick a new webmaster if he really wants to. Just having someone on board who makes sure savvy about grabbing and protecting domain names is important enough.

Edit: And I just noticed that while Ron Paul has secured "ronpaulshomepage.com", he has not secured "ronpaulhomepage.com" (without the "s"). How much you want to bet that at least half the people who listen to Ron Paul say "Go to ronpaulshomepage.com for more information" will leave out the "s" and end up at who knows where?