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 offered it 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.org back 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.
Processing your request, Please wait....
If i remember correctly, this was all Lew Rockwell’s doing. I don’t think RP even knows what a domain name is …
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
the 1st comment I saw on here had it mostly right(who was that Dan..ha & im Dan) …any way,if Dr Paul would have excepted it as a Gift,he would be responsible for everything done on that site while it was not in his control,long story short it could be a BS racist news letter story all over again,somthing on the site maybe could be takin out of context to look racist against my kind…but its all pointless,Dr Pauls body of work out weighs any of this nonsence
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
If he accepted the site as a gift, he would take responsibility for, and endorse everything on the site, even in the past. If he went through the other channel, he can always say, if there was something questionable on the site-it wasn’t me.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
More than likely his legal team did this on his behalf without his knowledge. Lawyers are after whatever money they can bill regardless of how it helps or hurts their clients.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
This seems odd. Which means all the information is not completely known. To me, for someone like RP to suddenly violate his beliefs would only, in my mind, indicate one of a very few options.
1. Complete and utter infiltration of one or both parties here.
2. Some kind of threat on RP to do something that he is completely against, which would probably have to be beyond a personal death threat, but family?
3. PDH (Pain Drug Hypnosis). (which is outlined in the book Psychopolitics – the bible for political control using drugs and mass media control, implemented by some of the Psychiatrists that Advised Hitler). http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/psychopolitics.htm
4. Or something worse… He’s a douche flopper.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
What happened here? This does not sound like something he could have done. Blows my mind. I hope more comes to the surface about this.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I remember when he filed with WIPO, it was the first time I completely disagreed with something he said or did. And it was so out of character for him, to go through the *UN*’s WIPO process, instead of simply accepting the gift from his supporters. Someone must be giving him terrible advice.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Most likely his lawyers told him WIPO was a better choice professionally rather than politically, albeit it can’t be helped that some people (for whatever reason) believe there was some political color to that decision.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This sounds like a troll who set this up to make him look bad. I don’t believe this story or its assertions. It seems lately that the status quo is losing control and lashing out in any unethical form they possibly can. Every organization is eventually infiltrated by the corrupt politicians who hold America in a chokehold. Is this the best they could do to make this man, of the highest integrity, have such a minimal shadow cast upon him. I trust Ron Paul before I trust whomever brought this story to light. You obviously are digging deep to try to discredit a pillar of this society regardless if you think your bringing truth to bear, you are off track.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
6 
3
It’s selfish to hold onto this site. Perhaps it would be better to put your pride to the side. And, to top it off, bad press and the expected media spin will result, and hinder anything good you thought would come out of this. I’m not sure what you guys are thinking?
You worked five hard years, great. Good job. We all applaud you for your work. Now, put your ego to the side and give the man the domain as you stated before.
You are holding back whatever Ron Paul and his team would like to do with this domain for selfish reasons.
Plus, I’m sure he would have a better webpage design than what you have on here as well.
Just my two cents.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
10 
6
I love the good doctor Paul- but as a loyal Ron Paul supporter i have to hold your feet to the fire sir! You taught me too good for this
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
2 
4
when it comes to who did more to spread the message its Ron Paul not ronpaul.com
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
9 
1
It makes no sense that Mr. Paul would file that kind of complaint when the group clearly offered him the domain with no strings attached. I’m a supporter of Mr. Paul, but this really throws me off.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
8 
3