The FINAL opinion on RonPaul.com?

[sailingaway]

The difference is that you're the one spinning it though.

Really? When the domain registrant put out that headline 'Ron Paul goes to the UN' do you think people reading that nationwide, most of whom never read the article, thought he was using a contractually listed arbitrator between the domain owner and the licensee?

 

[newbitech]

If you had explained what it did, as I did, it would not be a headline or controversial. The difference is the spin.

Why do I need to explain what WIPO is/does when one can simply link to their about page and read for themselves? As I recall, I did that. As I also recall, many including Lew Rockwell disputed WIPO's about page. Spin or no spin, the issue of Ron Paul filing an ICANN complaint against his supporters was bound for headlines.

http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/faq.html

[h=2]How does WIPO promote the protection of intellectual property?[/h]As part of the United Nations system of specialized agencies, WIPO serves as a forum for its Member States to establish and harmonize rules and practices for the protection of intellectual property rights. WIPO also services global registration systems for trademarks, industrial designs and appellations of origin, and a global filing system for patents. Most industrialized nations have intellectual property protection systems that are centuries old. Many new and developing countries, however, are in the process of building up their patent, trademark and copyright legal frameworks and systems. With the increasing globalization of trade and rapid changes in technological innovation, WIPO plays a key role in helping these new systems to evolve through treaty negotiation, registration, enforcement, legal and technical assistance and training in various forms.

Spin that.

 

[newbitech]

Really? When the domain registrant put out that headline 'Ron Paul goes to the UN' do you think people reading that nationwide, most of whom never read the article, thought he was using a contractually listed arbitrator between the domain owner and the licensee?

There was NO contract that forced Ron Paul to go to the damn UN. None. That is PURE spin, and not very good at that.

 

[newbitech]

here's a pretty good reason to detest WIPO

Intellectual property rights reward creativity and human endeavor, which fuel the progress of humankind. Some examples: the multibillion dollar film, recording, publishing and software industries – which bring pleasure to millions of people worldwide – would not exist without copyright protection; without the rewards provided by the patent system, researchers and inventors would have little incentive to continue producing better and more efficient products for consumers (for example, the development of vital new pharmaceutical products); and consumers would have no means to confidently buy products or services without reliable, international trademark protection and enforcement mechanisms to discourage counterfeiting and piracy.

I just highlighted a couple of things that should give any honest individual pause for concern.

You see, WIPO in very much intertwined with fascist forms of governance. Clearly those industries and their international patents and copyright protections are not stifling invention. It's big money, big business in bed with big government hoarding technology and creating artificial barriers of entry that are blocking meaningful production!

WIPO is very much a part of the globalist agenda. They don't innocently arbitrate domain disputes for the benefit of all. Like any government agency, they are for sale to the highest bidder.

Yes, their competition is just as corrupt and foul, but at least their competition is one rung below them on the globalist scale.

 

[sailingaway]

None of that has anything to do with Ron using a contractually listed forum for disputes.

 

[newbitech]

None of that has anything to do with Ron using a contractually listed forum for disputes.

a contractually listed forum which he could have chosen a private arbitration panel based in the United States governed by United States laws. But instead chose a global fascist arbitration panel based in geneva switzerland governed by no one except themselves.

 

[sailingaway]

a contractually listed forum which he could have chosen a private arbitration panel based in the United States governed by United States laws. But instead chose a global fascist arbitration panel based in geneva switzerland governed by no one except themselves.

there were only a few. It didn't have to be on the list, and it wasn't for UN powers, just acting as a dispute forum. He didn't put it there.

 

[newbitech]

there were only a few. It didn't have to be on the list, and it wasn't for UN powers, just acting as a dispute forum. He didn't put it there.

Yeah, I supposed the IMF isn't for using UN powers, just innocently acting as a backstop to failed central banks.

And so what if he didn't put it there. He friggin used it! Which I really don't have that much an issue with except the people pretending like he didn't! AND lying about it! Rockwell and his lawyers for starters, and all the other parrot heads out there who will say the sky is neon yellow if one of Ron Pauls minions said so!

 

[sailingaway]

So what? He used WIPO not the UN. WIPO is an arbitration dispute resolution facility. That the UN set it up is obviously not the reason it was chosen, but that it works on matters of this type a lot. Otherwise all would have been un dispute resolution facilities.

 

[newbitech]

So what? He used WIPO not the UN. WIPO is an arbitration dispute resolution facility. That the UN set it up is obviously not the reason it was chosen, but that it works on matters of this type a lot. Otherwise all would have been un dispute resolution facilities.

You are trying to make a distinction between something that is not distinct. That's like saying I called the CIA and not the federal government!

And WIPO is much more than an arbitration dispute resolution facility. Regardless of the reason it was chosen, the UN did set it up.

Not sure what you mean all would have been UN dispute resolution facilities. No, there are several options and only one of them is the UN.

Hell he could have taken it to court in the USA> thats a dispute resolution facility as well!

and money is a pretty good arbiter of disputes.. just saying. He chose the option that would bring him the greatest amount of scrutiny from those of us who believe the entire process is a sham, and from the media generating headlines, and from just about every other angle.

And for what?

 

[sailingaway]

No it isn't. The CIA is the federal government. It is NOT specified in private contracts as a dispute mechanism anyone who pays the fee can use.

WIPO is.

It may yet go to court, this seems a lot faster and less expensive.

You don't seem to think intellectual property, despite being based on his life's work, is real property. That is fine, some think that. But spinning him as doing something wrong in 'going to the UN' when he went to a dispute forum off a list in their contract, which anyone who pays a fee can use, is spin.

The arbitration forum selected off their list isn't a substantive issue.

 

[newbitech]

No it isn't. The CIA is the federal government. It is NOT specified in private contracts as a dispute mechanism anyone who pays the fee can use.

WIPO is.

It may yet go to court, this seems a lot faster and less expensive.

You don't seem to think intellectual property, despite being based on his life's work, is real property. That is fine, some think that. But spinning him as doing something wrong in 'going to the UN' when he went to a dispute forum off a list in their contract, which anyone who pays a fee can use, is spin.

The arbitration forum selected off their list isn't a substantive issue.

Right cause if the CIA's illegal profiting activities were bound by contract it would mean they weren't part of the fedgov. Really? You detach WIPO from the UN because they charge a fee? How does that make sense?

This has nothing to do with what I think about intellectual property. I didn't spin him as doing anything! The claim was made that he went to the UN. Guess what? He did! Clearly there is a problem with that otherwise folks like Rockwell and Ron Paul's lawyers wouldn't need to make up lies and spin stories about how it doesn't matter where he went.

It does matter because the man's life work, his real property as you'd like to call it, was based in large part on dissolving overreaching government powers, of which the UN which WIPO acts on behalf of is the largest government overreach there can possibly be!

Did he do something wrong? Yeah, he didn't buy his domain when it was cheap. Is that morally wrong? Probably not. But taking away control of something that was never in his control IS morally wrong. Real property or not.

 

[The Free Hornet]

So many of my principles are completely disregarded in this whole process. I reject the legitimacy of the process hands down. So regardless of the decision by the panel on their illegitimate licensing schemes, I still believe the people controlling RonPaul.com did nothing wrong. They may lose the domain, but they absolutely do not deserve the treatment they have received from Ron Paul's lawyers (lying in the claim), nor his close associates(lying and spinning the UN issues), nor his army of loyal to a fault supporters(do I even need to detail the pitiful treatment?).

No I do not know all the facts, but neither have I fabricated a hateful response directed at anyone based on missing information that I have conveniently filled in in hopes that others would simply ignore it!

Are you intending to deceive others or just yourself?

Most here are certainly not "loyal to a fault". I have my disagreements with Ron Paul on abortion, marriage, IP. Often, I think RP puts too much emphasis on state's rights versus individual rights (but that is a strategy disagreement, not one based on principle). Plus I'm atheist, and Ron Paul isn't. That can creep into some culture war issues.

What exactly have I spun?

#1:

Ron Paul went to the UN when he had other options.

#2:

ICANN itself is an example of global fascism, hell it's on the cutting edge.

This dispute is between private parties on the private playground of ICANN. If you really feel this way, you ought to have no dog in this fight.

 

[sailingaway]

Right cause if the CIA's illegal profiting activities were bound by contract it would mean they weren't part of the fedgov. Really? You detach WIPO from the UN because they charge a fee? How does that make sense?

This has nothing to do with what I think about intellectual property. I didn't spin him as doing anything! The claim was made that he went to the UN. Guess what? He did! Clearly there is a problem with that otherwise folks like Rockwell and Ron Paul's lawyers wouldn't need to make up lies and spin stories about how it doesn't matter where he went.

It does matter because the man's life work, his real property as you'd like to call it, was based in large part on dissolving overreaching government powers, of which the UN which WIPO acts on behalf of is the largest government overreach there can possibly be!

Did he do something wrong? Yeah, he didn't buy his domain when it was cheap. Is that morally wrong? Probably not. But taking away control of something that was never in his control IS morally wrong. Real property or not.

I have no problem with your thinking his making a claim is wrong, but argue your point on its merits, not by trying to spin him as some globalist hypocrite.

 

[newbitech]

Are you intending to deceive others or just yourself?

Most here are certainly not "loyal to a fault". I have my disagreements with Ron Paul on abortion, marriage, IP. Often, I think RP puts too much emphasis on state's rights versus individual rights (but that is a strategy disagreement, not one based on principle). Plus I'm atheist, and Ron Paul isn't. That can creep into some culture war issues.




#1:



#2:



This dispute is between private parties on the private playground of ICANN. If you really feel this way, you ought to have no dog in this fight.

#1 he did go to the UN, he did have other options. I am not sure how that can be spun.
#2 If you really think ICANN is private perhaps you are the one deceiving yourself. They say the FED REZ is private too.

 

[newbitech]

I have no problem with your thinking his making a claim is wrong, but argue your point on its merits, not by trying to spin him as some globalist hypocrite.

I don't need to argue my points. I simply show you where what was claimed was true. Ron Paul went to the UN. I am not the one bending over backwards to deny it! No one has spun Ron Paul as a globalist hypocrite! It is no ones fault but his own that he took a seemingly contradictory action to his much ballyhooed principles when other options existed.

 

[sailingaway]

#1 he did go to the UN, he did have other options. I am not sure how that can be spun.
#2 If you really think ICANN is private perhaps you are the one deceiving yourself. They say the FED REZ is private too.

Just calling it 'the un' is spin. It is WIPO.

 

[newbitech]

Just calling it 'the un' is spin. It is WIPO.

Calling "IT"? You mean calling a UN agency the UN is spin? How so? Do I need to specifically mention which department is the one performing virtual rape at airports or is it really spin to say that the federal government has sanctioned genital groping of children and old ladies as a condition to fly?

 

[sailingaway]

 

[newbitech]

see how you are the one making the big deal out of him going to the UN? As if the matter would significantly change whether its some other UN agency he went to.

And while we are at it, what are you calling the UN? Is it not the organization that Ron Paul says, and I quote,

Those bureaucrats are not satisfied by meddling only in international disputes, however. The UN increasingly wants to influence our domestic environmental, trade, labor, tax, and gun laws. Its global planners fully intend to expand the UN into a true world government, complete with taxes, courts, and a standing army. This is not an alarmist statement; these facts are readily promoted on the UN's own website. UN planners do not care about national sovereignty; in fact they are actively hostile to it. They correctly view it as an obstacle to their plans. They simply aren't interested in our Constitution and republican form of government.

Would you object to adding "Intellectual Property Laws" to the list I have highlighted in RED?

How about the section in blue? Does it make you feel better that the department that is doing that is called WIPO?

And what about Ron Paul's words in green. Where he cites the facts readily promoted on the UN's own website?

So you see, I am not the one making the big deal about going to the UN. Ron Paul already has handled that. But sitting here trying to deny that Ron Paul has in fact made an appeal to the UN is getting rather desperate IMO.

Why not debate the merits of the action like you said rather than continually denying it? Is it because denying means we don't have to admit some painful truths about the matter?

It is not I who insinuates that Ron Paul is a globalist hypocrite. That is something you are defending against, and I really don't understand why! If he were a globalist hypocrite, we would have figured that out by now.

Instead, what he is, is a man just like me forced by powers out of his control to live in a world were such things as the UN and overreaching and overbearing global centralist government exists and exerts its power over our lives daily.

And just like me, Ron Paul probably makes decisions on a daily basis that grind against his own personal virtues and beliefs. This doesn't make him or I any less of a man.

Sadly what it does is frustrates us every waking hour and probably drives him daily to find every possible way he can to turn back that tide.

In this case, he didn't do that. He failed, yes FAILED to act in a way that would work against the tide. Rather in this case he simply went with the flow, as so many of us do on a daily basis.

Does that make him someone to not look up too? No it doesn't! Does that make him a hypocrite? No it doesn't. It makes him a man, full of flaws and blemishes, just like any other man.