Posted on 03/29/2006 7:29:54 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
A SPECIAL domain for sex websites has bitten the dust at an international meeting in New Zealand today, with Australia, the US and the European Union moving to kill off a proposal for ICANN to create a ".xxx" domain for pornography.
Amid vociferous opposition, ICANN, the international body that is responsible for internet domain names, has been considering a proposal by US company ICM Registry for the new code.
But governments have been fighting a rearguard action to have the plan canned, with the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission writing to ICANN opposing the proposal.
Australia brought the issue to a head earlier this week with Communications Minister Helen Coonan saying she had "serious concerns" that the domain would legitimise illegal material.
ICANN's governmental advisory committee today put the nail in the coffin of .xxx, saying "several (governments) are emphatically opposed from a public policy perspective to the introduction of .xxx".
The grouping - which represents governments - said special protections for children and provisions to help law enforcement agencies identify the owners of web sites promised by the registry had not been included in its contract.
"In its application ... ICM Registry promised a range of public interest benefits as part of its bid to operate the .xxx domain," said GAC chairman Sharil Tarmizi, who represents the Malaysian Government. "To GAC's knowledge these undertakings have not yet been included as obligations in the proposed registry agreement negotiated with ICANN."
I think public pressure could resurrect this.
Businesses should demand it too. Want to stop people from viewing porn at work? Block the .xxx addresses. It could be a boon for parents, as well. Just block all the .xxx sites.
"Businesses should demand it too. Want to stop people from viewing porn at work? Block the .xxx addresses. It could be a boon for parents, as well. Just block all the .xxx sites."
The existing .com sex domains have a value of tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars. Would the government just seize those assets witout compensation? Or would we like to pay them the billions for taking their property? There is no good way to do this.
This is all truly puzzling. Other than "vague" objections like this one, I have yet to hear a rational argument against the proposal anywhere.
What makes does doing nothing (maintain the status quo) preferable? why exactly?
Having the .XXX domain makes it possible to block or filter out all content, and any ISP sources who fail to police themselves would be blocked in their entirety, a rather powerful incentive to not allow content belonging in the .XXX domain.
Does any one have arguments pro and con?
Who was supporting the "xxx" domain registry? Certainly, it's easier to block at the browser level...
There is certainly some way to put the nudie mags "behind the counter"?
That argument makes no sense. .com sex domain have that value only if someone else can use them for the identical purpose the are used for now.
What makes their transfer to the .XXX domain any less valuable? Are you suggesting that the accidental access to these sites has intrinsic value?
I don't understand why any "compensation" is necessary. It's exactly like giving the tenants of a porn shop an identical facility elsewhere. Being a net presence, the there is no "physical" location!
It would put porn on the Internet.
Let's be thankful Ladies, there is no pornography on the Internet.
Wonder how many porn queens, and fluffers, were feverishly lobbying various government officials to make sure the proposal went limp.
"The existing .com sex domains have a value of tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars. Would the government just seize those assets witout compensation? Or would we like to pay them the billions for taking their property? There is no good way to do this."
Actually, there is a very good way to do this.
Give them the .xxx site in exchange for the .com site.
Close the .com site (allow only redirects from that site) for 5 years. Then reauction it.
Would that be a fair solution?
I still don't understand what the opposition to this was. The sites are there, and will continue to be. This would have made them easy to block, but the $#!%$@# bluenose politicos couldn't allow it because it'd have been admitting there is such a thing as sex on the internet, I guess.
"I still don't understand what the opposition to this was."
The opposition is that you are taking away private property and private property owners don't like that.
The proposal would also have involved censoring all remaining .com domains and lots of disagreement as to what constitutes porn. Think of how many message board have postings with some nudity.
There is no porn on Free Republic.com but do we really want the Government deciding what we are allow to post? Isn't that a job for the owner and the admins?
I'd think that a closer analogy involving physical property would be renaming the street that abuts someone's downtown property. That shop would have the same physical location, but rather than an address of 123 Main Street their mail would now be delivered to 123 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Same old storefront, same merchandise, just a different line on an order form.
Agreed on all counts. The silver lining in all of this is that there isn't necessarily a corrupt heavy hand of the public sector dictating this. Seems to be more along the lines of a Homeowners Association.
The intellectual property aspect, however, doesn't provide for a redress of grievances.
if icann changes it, that's it. it's not the "government" doing it.
PlayBoy would just become PlayBoy.sex and NOBODY else could register PlayBoy.com... it would be retired and any intellectual property rights would transfer to PlayBoy.sex.
if they don't like it, icann can just trun off their number till they do. no theft involved.
If they'd done their job properly, nothing would have gone limp!
The legal precedent already exists for compensation for taking a .com domain. If the resulting .xxx domain has a lower market value then the lawsuits would be overwhleming and spread over 100+ countries.
Its just not practical in a capitalist world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.