Will the Ron Paul Channel Get Crushed?

cajuncocoa said:
I agree, that would have been better. It's something sorely needed to help those of us in our quest to help to educate others to our cause.
Click to expand...

I'm of the opinion that when we do something we should do it better than anyone else. I like the concept that he has with this, but the more I look at it the more I am disappointed in the product. Take The Blaze for example, they have a bunch of different programs they produce every day. A ton more content. I was hoping for something more than that from Ron. Like someone would have signed up for the Blaze, watched it for a week or two and said, "ok let's do that our way"
 
CaptLouAlbano said:
I'm of the opinion that when we do something we should do it better than anyone else. I like the concept that he has with this, but the more I look at it the more I am disappointed in the product. Take The Blaze for example, they have a bunch of different programs they produce every day. A ton more content. I was hoping for something more than that from Ron. Like someone would have signed up for the Blaze, watched it for a week or two and said, "ok let's do that our way"
Click to expand...
I don't know if they would be willing to listen, but someone with a knowledge of how to get this done should get in contact with them before it goes wrong too far.
 
cajuncocoa said:
I don't know if they would be willing to listen, but someone with a knowledge of how to get this done should get in contact with them before it goes wrong too far.
Click to expand...

I just wish that several people could get together, like Ron, Ben Swann, etc... and do this right. All of this duplicate effort, money, equipment, etc. going to waste.
Ben pulled together 200K+ up front but is using it in a separate effort from Ron's. What is with this, I don't understand.
 
ClydeCoulter said:
I just wish that several people could get together, like Ron, Ben Swann, etc... and do this right. All of this duplicate effort, money, equipment, etc. going to waste.
Ben pulled together 200K+ up front but is using it in a separate effort from Ron's. What is with this, I don't understand.
Click to expand...

Another fantastic idea. +rep
 
ClydeCoulter said:
I just wish that several people could get together, like Ron, Ben Swann, etc... and do this right. All of this duplicate effort, money, equipment, etc. going to waste.
Ben pulled together 200K+ up front but is using it in a separate effort from Ron's. What is with this, I don't understand.
Click to expand...

I like that too, create a network of sorts. Honestly that is what I assumed this was going to be. I am sure he will get his fare share of sign ups, but it would hard for me to market this product to anyone other than the most die hard fan.
 
FSP-Rebel said:
Exactly what I have been pondering. He needs to stop using his name for this channel or his peace and prosperity institute as this will yield limited appeal. Thus, it will stay as a money-only generating outfit w/ little to no expansion in spreading the message. Good job on your second assessment pointing out how some supporters can be viewed.
Click to expand...

you will get flamed....
 
mczerone said:
If he's really interested in spreading the liberty message, he should be giving away most of the content for free. He should not care about the repeated sharing of the videos. He should get youtube ad revenue if he wants to keep costs covered, and ask for donations at the end of each episode, or an Amazon affiliate program, or selling value-added products through the show (e.g. autographed books from his collection or his guests, DRM protected bonus content, or tie-ins to live events).

As it stands now, this production fits one of the two standard operating procedures evident from RP's brand: (1) absolute incompetence in marketing, financial management, employee oversight, and concern for broad-appeal, or (2) only caring about growing RP's personal/family net worth by taking money from the gullible and fervent supporters who view him as a messiah.
Click to expand...

This is what he has always done. It is what he has always been. There isnt anything wrong with it. Its a shock to some of us though.
 
I do not believe IP / knowledge can be owned.
I don't believe digital content can be owned.
I don't believe in owned code.
I don't believe in text, writings, images, or any of the like.

I'll engage in discussion of trademark on a fraud level,

but I have zero interest in protecting the "statist imposed monopolies", "corporate fascism", and "artificial scarcity" of copyright or patents.

http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Libertarian:perspectives:on:intellectual:property.html

Home > Libertarian perspectives on intellectual property


One question that divides libertarians is the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of privileges such as copyright, patent, and trademark -- those usually subsumed under the rubric of " intellectual property".

Many libertarians, particularly those unaware of online politics, don't have a strong opinion on the topic. A good number consider it a minor matter in the light of greater government violations of ordinary everyday rights, including regular property.

Some natural-law libertarians believe in a right of authors and inventors to control others' copying of their creations. They usually believe this right should have all the conventional attributes of property, including perpetual inheritance. They differentiate between the intellectual property (e.g. a blueprint, or music) and its physical manifestation (e.g. the machine or a copy of the music), the former being used to create the latter. They believe, therefore, that an owner's control over the use of his/her property extends to control over the use of intellectual property. Nonetheless, such a right (in their view) would exist regardless of whether government chose to enforce it.


Other natural-law libertarians believe that intellectual property is but a monopoly privilege that wouldn't exist but for government intervention, and that it should be abolished. To them, whatever secrecy and exclusivity are to exist should be achieved out of voluntary contracts, the cost of which are to be born by those who try to achieve secrecy and exclusivity.


There are also libertarians who consider patent rights to be monopoly priviledges mainly based on the fact that they bind people who may never have heard of the patent, nor the inventor. These libertarians may accept copyrights as similar ends could arise from contracts between supplier and receiver of information.

A few minarchists, including most Objectivists, accept the mainstream justifications of copyright et al. as monopolies useful to the market, regarding them as necessary acts of government to promote industrial and authorial innovation. Other libertarians consider the grant of monopoly to be beyond the pale of minarchism.

Many libertarians consider copyright and patent to be forms of enclosure -- illegitimate government creation of exclusive privilege by prohibiting most individuals from accessing commons. Copyright and patents are government-granted monopolies on production, and no better than a government-granted monopoly on producing food or Internet service.

Trademark, unlike copyright and patent, can be construed as a protection against fraud and misrepresentation: it ensures that others cannot abuse a successful product's good name to promote an inferior knockoff. Since most libertarians believe that fraud should be criminal, they agree in this regard with trademark law.

However, in many jurisdictions the concept of trademark dilution has developed to protect trademarks as a property right, securing the investment the trademark owner has made in establishing and promoting a strong mark without regard to likelihood for confusion. This has even been used to limit free speech about a product, something few libertarians would be likely to defend.

Anarcho-capitalists might differ as to the final answer, but agree that the optimal answer would emerge from a free market in justice and protection.
Click to expand...


I believe in the hermetic/alchemist rule:


If you want to keep some bit of knowledge to yourself, don't share it.


This whole concept of IP is about to crumble in the P2P interconnected, encrypted, 3d printed age.


If you want to give Ron Paul $10/mo to watch his channel "live", God Bless You.
If you want to share a youtube copy with your friends, God Bless You too.


I can guarantee you however, that any content produced WILL eventually find its way to some dark alley in the commons. This tendency is a blessing not a curse.




Lao Tzu: "The highest good is like water."

[h=2]8[/h]The supreme good is like water,
which nourishes all things without trying to.
It is content with the low places that people disdain.
Thus it is like the Tao.

In dwelling, live close to the ground.
In thinking, keep to the simple.
In conflict, be fair and generous.
In governing, don't try to control.
In work, do what you enjoy.
In family life, be completely present.

When you are content to be simply yourself
and don't compare or compete,
everybody will respect you.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
FrankRep said:
Lets see how Libertarians deal with Intellectual Property rights in real life.

This should be fun.
Click to expand...

We already know, don't we? PDFs to Ron Paul's newest books were on the web within days of them being released. Don't you recall the issue being discussed here at the time. I found it to be pretty disgusting, personally.
 
ClydeCoulter said:
I just wish that several people could get together, like Ron, Ben Swann, etc... and do this right. All of this duplicate effort, money, equipment, etc. going to waste.
Ben pulled together 200K+ up front but is using it in a separate effort from Ron's. What is with this, I don't understand.
Click to expand...

Yeah there's too much talent lying around for this not to happen. If they could coordinate they could create something lasting and kickass.
 
I think the video up is doing more for raising awareness and revenue than taking it down ever could. Cheep advertising?

I would think from seeing the subscription cost it isn't going to be a business decision that gets us to subscribe. It's going to take good old fashioned heart and the will to go the extra mile for the love of country.



http://www.ronpaulchannel.com/
 
Last edited:
i have 'theronpaulshow' on youtube. i am willing to donate it to ron if i can get in touch with the right people. i dont update it much cause i dont have the time. i owe him this if he wants it.
 
The Ron Paul Channel could also take off by being used in a commercial manor by the main stream media.
 
FrankRep said:
Lets see how Libertarians deal with Intellectual Property rights in real life.

This should be fun.
Click to expand...
You could already see it if you bothered to pay attention. See mises.org and matveimediaarts.blogspot.com for two of many examples.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bryan
Greatest Ron Paul videos
Replies
0
Views
282
Bryan
Bryan
Brian4Liberty
American Neocons Get Their Iran War as Congress Sleeps
Replies
0
Views
1K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Ron Paul Institute Conference, Lake Jackson, March 2025
Replies
5
Views
165
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
O
Ancient Egypt Did Not Exist
Replies
0
Views
71
orafi
O
PAF
Tariffs are Theft
2
Replies
27
Views
490
CCTelander
C
Back
Top