A gay couple owns jebbushforpresident.com
February 2, 2015 9:49 PM   Subscribe

 
High-tech bears!
posted by rtha at 9:57 PM on February 2, 2015 [10 favorites]


I, for one, welcome our new tech bear leaders.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:05 PM on February 2, 2015 [7 favorites]


Is Jeb Bush notoriously anti-gay or something? He's not really in the news down here.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:18 PM on February 2, 2015


I was kinda worried what kind of precedent this would set, but I guess it shouldn't be surprising, as "hillaryforpresident.com" seems to lead to an anti-Obama site.

Time ran a story last year about other Clinton URLs getting taken early, but I guess it was a more innocent era then, as they only give pro-Clinton examples of site owners.
posted by TheSecretDecoderRing at 10:24 PM on February 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Is Jeb Bush notoriously anti-gay or something?

To quote Jeb Bush, gays are like bank robbers, drug dealers, litterbugs, and people who didn't get a permit from the permit office, among other weird psychotic bullshit:
"However, I do not believe that government should create a new class of citizens with special legal rights.

"It is disingenuous of you to write that “the governor must stand up for and represent all the people of the Sunshine State on all matters.” You imply that discrimination is always wrong, yet government and individual Floridians discriminate every day in innumerable ways. Government discriminates against bank robbers, drug dealers, litterbugs, and homeowners who repair their seawall without a permit, just to name a few."
Granted, that gem was written in 1994, but scratch a Bush and find a bigot with weird ideas about how the gays need permits.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:13 PM on February 2, 2015 [29 favorites]


haha...
posted by chance at 11:36 PM on February 2, 2015


Is Jeb Bush notoriously anti-gay or something? He's not really in the news down here.

He's not notoriously anything in most of the country, except for notoriously being another Bush.

His party is quite notoriously very terrible, horrible, no good, very bad anti-gay.
posted by univac at 11:46 PM on February 2, 2015 [13 favorites]


Time for some Bush on Bush porn.
posted by ...tm... at 1:08 AM on February 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


He's not notoriously anything in most of the country, except for notoriously being another Bush.

Notorious Bush is enough
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:05 AM on February 3, 2015


Brand of Bothers.
posted by spitbull at 3:49 AM on February 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


jebbushforpresident.business is available!
posted by oulipian at 4:10 AM on February 3, 2015


What about jebbushforpresident.xxx? Is that available?
posted by oceanjesse at 4:36 AM on February 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Tee hee.
posted by kinnakeet at 4:50 AM on February 3, 2015


Maybe Jeb Bush's campaign will set up at hottechbears.com. Then who will be laughing? Huh?
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:52 AM on February 3, 2015 [12 favorites]


Isn't this a clear case of Cybersquatting? They're one expensive lawsuit away from losing that domain name.

(Though if they manage to whip up an Onion-like parody site for Jeb Bush, they might escape under fair use protections)
posted by ymgve at 4:57 AM on February 3, 2015


Isn't this a clear case of Cybersquatting?

Armchair lawyering here, but I don't think so. They've already said they have no intention of selling the domain, and they don't seem to be doing this for profit. Merely spreading awareness.

Idk for sure though, that's just speculation on my part.
posted by Twain Device at 5:27 AM on February 3, 2015


Isn't this a clear case of Cybersquatting? They're one expensive lawsuit away from losing that domain name.

Nope! The UDRP policy is here. No bad faith, probably there is a legitimate interest for these guys. Admittedly it is confusingly similar to a service mark used by Jeb, that being his name. But this is a pretty standard scenario. Good on the tech bears!
posted by Lemurrhea at 5:51 AM on February 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's cute and I endorse their views but to my mind it's not a huge coup of any kind. Most major-office candidates just use their name: BarackObama.com, Hilary Clinton.com, ElizabethWarren.com (same pattern holds true for Republicans). Sometimes they set up alternative domains that all point to the same place (voteObama.com, Obama2012.com). Most candidates' campaigns buy out some particularly egregious names but they can't possibly buy out every single "ObamaIsATerrorist.com" that any loon can think of, so there are always rogue anti-candidate URLS out there.I don't think it will rank high in search unless it really becomes a great up-to-date site for election news and perspectives not coming from elswhere, so likely will not surprise too many people. But it's cute.
posted by Miko at 5:53 AM on February 3, 2015 [3 favorites]


[…] but I guess it was a more innocent era then, as they only give pro-Clinton examples of site owners.

A friend of mine owns ready4hillary.com (warning: autoplay music) he is most definitely not a Clinton supporter.

Isn't this a clear case of Cybersquatting? They're one expensive lawsuit away from losing that domain name.

More like many expensive lawsuits from not losing it. You would have to take it to WIPO or ICANN or some body and win there. I own like 17 domain names. Not all even have websites. Some I use for email, some for sandboxes, etc. It's exceptionally difficult to prove someone else's use of a site isn't legitimate.

It would also be ridiculously easy to also make Jeb Bush wish he'd not tried to take it. Just mention something about how he hates the 1st Amendment and needs to run to the French for redress.
posted by cjorgensen at 5:56 AM on February 3, 2015


It's cute and I endorse their views but to my mind it's not a huge coup of any kind.

Yep, no one wants a domain as long as "jebbushforpresident.com", especially when you have a name as short as Jeb Bush.
posted by smackfu at 6:08 AM on February 3, 2015


I just bought " techbears.com " .
posted by Liquidwolf at 7:50 AM on February 3, 2015 [7 favorites]


the gays need permits

That would make for one weird government office.
posted by jonmc at 8:13 AM on February 3, 2015 [4 favorites]


Just us high tech bears doing high tech things.
posted by Strass at 8:37 AM on February 3, 2015


Metafilter: scratched Bushes with weird ideas about how the gays need permits.
posted by jonp72 at 8:51 AM on February 3, 2015


So I guess the answer is yes, the bears do shit on the bushes.
posted by benito.strauss at 9:23 AM on February 3, 2015 [6 favorites]


I guess us high tech otters will have to continue smashing things on our tummies until our day arrives.
posted by msbutah at 10:38 AM on February 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


Time for some Bush on Bush porn.

Historically, Republicans are more concerned with queer men than with queer women.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:07 AM on February 3, 2015 [5 favorites]


please...
posted by clavdivs at 5:50 PM on February 3, 2015


Please what?
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 6:10 PM on February 3, 2015


« Older Chipotle: The Definitive Oral History   |   The Horrors of Solitary Confinement Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments