Ron Paul loses disputes over and domain names

Former politician denied relief in dispute over two Ron Paul domain names.

[Update: Paul found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking in case.]

Ron Paul has lost two separate domain name disputes filed with the World Intellectual Property Organization.

The two cases covered and, and were part of a public spat between the domain owners, who say they are Ron Paul supporters, and the politician.

The owner of offered to sell the domain name to Paul, or to give him the .org version for free. The domain owner claimed the value it was seeking in the sale was from its mailing list of Ron Paul supporters.

According to whois, there are two different owners for the .com and .org domains. However, given the communications, they are clearly linked in some way.

Both domain names are owned by groups in Panama.

The decisions have not been posted yet, and I will update the story when they are. I have obtained copies of the decisions. In the case of, Paul was found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking.

It’s possible that the complaints were denied on the basis of laches, in that Paul had not disputed the ownership of the domains while the registrants built of a significant web presence on the domains. It was only after he exited congress that he went after the domains.

Nevertheless, the domain owners have made money selling Ron Paul merchandise and tried to sell the .com domain to Paul.

I’m not aware of any pending lawsuits that would have led WIPO to terminate the proceedings.


  1. John Berryhill says

    @Jeff – I wasn’t thinking the conspiracy theory would show up so soon. The denial of the complaint was a false flag inside job by highly placed Illuminati. There is undeniable proof in grainy YouTube videos played backwards.

  2. Ms Domainer says



    Given the use of the domains and how the owner made money on someone else’s name, Ron Paul probably should have won this dispute.

    I’m NOT a Ron Paul fan, BTW, just someone who likes consistency.


  3. JEFF says

    Hi Mr. BerryHill,

    I respect your legal acumen but now officially have your number. You are a statist idiot. Glad I now know this as I will never use you as an attorney.

    PS – As if to support my position, it seems a Reverse Domain Hijack was issued on the .org
    Lol,…maybe he’ll show up on the Domain King’s list.

    PPS – When the dollar collapses…idiots like Mr. Berryhill will have blood on their hands.

  4. says


    If you don’t see the “event horizon” clearly yet, then nothing anybody can say will convince you. Unfortunately, Keynesian claptrap is “par excellence” for certain ilk.

  5. JEFF says

    David Z.

    Seems maybe you need to wake up…along with Mr. Berryhill.

    The reason everything is so dire is because there are too many Keynesian sheep.


  6. says

    Actually, I asked “Huh?” because – other than ranting against people one finds disagreeable for whatever reason – I don’t see how the comment I quoted that time serves any productive, useful purpose to this article.

    The point of this article is that Ron Paul lost his UDRP for his domain namesakes. Other than maybe just stating one’s opinion, I don’t know this kind of comment:

    like a UN outfit like WIPO was going to let Ron Paul win

    no IRONY here

    Is any true to any factual degree. Unless, of course, it’s just an opinion.

  7. says

    BTW, JEFF and Peter g: I’m not from the U.S. I’m just interested in discussing and understanding this particular dispute, rather than whatever beliefs some people have on lawyers, politics, or similar.

    And don’t worry, I understand the sometimes feeling of seeming invincibility – or superiority – of answering in a way that arguably looks and talks down on others, especially out of frustration. I’m not interested in doing that, though, and I wish you both well anyway.

  8. flynnt mishagin says

    Isn’t Ron Paul just interfering with our right to conduct free enterprise? Which is his mantra, for pete’s sake?

  9. cinesimon says

    Oh, poor, childish little David Z. I suggest you read your last post, then consider the term ‘projection. I mean, wow – that is quite the lack of self awareness. Not surprising, for a cookie-cutter faux-libertarian.
    Your understanding of economics is obviously not too thoroughly researched – it’s pretty obvious that you liked what you saw after reading some teenage Randian fantasy for half an hour, and have decided that those who actually deal in reality are just sheep. Because research and factual evidence is all a part of the conspiracy, right kiddo?
    It’s all about what you know in your gut, huh?
    Yay for Randian truthiness! Entertaining people with more than half a brain cell since January 2009!

  10. David Z says

    @cinesimon – there’s a time and place to argue economics, law, and politics. The article here specifically discussed Ron Paul’s losing the UDRP for his domain name-sakes, rather than some people’s (cynical) take on the 3 topics I mentioned.

    Personally, I sometimes like to discuss economics, law, and politics mainly to understand things better. I’m just not talking about any of them in this one, even though others (understandably) vent their frustration on sometimes-unfair scenarios of those 3 or on people who don’t agree with them.

    But, you sure cared enough to make that ad hominem/attack on my character, just as I cared enough to respond to you. Tempting as it is to respond to you in kind, I doubt that makes things any better other than soothing personal egos.

    Despite what you said, though, I still appreciate your sign of care. Cheers.

Leave a Reply