Ron Paul is not party to that contract, nor does he have any valid claim to the domain, not being a unique Ron Paul, just one of the better known.

Your denial is understandable, with Ron Paul turning to be a phoney prophet of libertarianism faith.

On of the key gospels of libertarianism is freedom from coercion, especially when applied to private property. Ron Pauls actions go directly against this key principle, he is trying to coerce legitimate owner into less desirable deal with legal action.

This leaves us with two possibilities:

1. Libertarianism is flawed in some aspects
2. Ron Paul is acting against principles of libertarianism

Pick your poison.

[Linked Image]