Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'.XXX' Domain Name Under Consideration Again
CNS ^ | 01/19/2007 | Nathan Burchfiel

Posted on 01/19/2007 11:30:21 AM PST by lpeterboyd

'.XXX' Domain Name Under Consideration Again
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
January 19, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - The organization in charge of approving Internet domains has reintroduced a controversial proposal to create a domain registry specifically for pornographic content.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in June 2005 approved the creation of the ".xxx" domain. But in May 2006, the organization voted against a contract with domain distributor ICM Registry, in part because of outcry from conservative family groups.

Since then, the ICANN and ICM Registry have worked to revise the terms of the original contract, adding policies aimed at prohibiting child pornography, requiring content labeling, prohibiting deceptive marketing and prohibiting unsolicited marketing.

ICANN began accepting public feedback on the revised contract on Jan. 5 and conservatives have relaunched a campaign to prevent its creation.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: domain; internet; pornography; technology

1 posted on 01/19/2007 11:30:23 AM PST by lpeterboyd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

The pornos will never allow it because people will be able to block access to the sites.


2 posted on 01/19/2007 11:31:35 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

I am so disgusted with the lack of decent tools to control kids online. An entire generation is being distracted from doing their work because we can't get tools to block Myspace, youtube and AIM that work. The operative phrase is "that work".


3 posted on 01/19/2007 11:34:40 AM PST by kinghorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

The ACLU will fight it on the legal theory that there will be no consensus possible on what crosses the line from art to porn. I think they are wrong. I think that a system does not have to be perfect, and I would expect websites could be allowed to appeal. I think it would be great, especially for making it easier to write web-browsing filters and protect the youth.


4 posted on 01/19/2007 11:36:54 AM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

Why would the "conservative family groups" oppose this? It seems that they'd be all for putting all the "adult" places under one domain which you could then easily block.


5 posted on 01/19/2007 11:38:43 AM PST by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
The pornos will never allow it because people will be able to block access to the sites.

But the article attributes the opposition to conservative pro-family groups.

I would favor the idea enthusiastically if there could be some way to require that all pornographers to register under the .XXX domain name. As you said, that would give people an easy way to block porn sites.

6 posted on 01/19/2007 11:39:21 AM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kinghorse
The operative phrase is "that work".

Such tools will not be invented. Take that from someone who writes software for a living. No matter how good the controls and blocks, the ways around it will always be better.

I see no problem with a .xxx domain. It allows us more discretion in choosing what to see or not see, and it doesn't prevent people engaged in a legal, if not moral, business enterprise from conducting business.
7 posted on 01/19/2007 11:40:16 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81; kinghorse
Such tools will not be invented.

With the caveat that putting everything under a .xxx will make exceedingly simple blocking tools effective where now even sophisticated tools won't or ever will be effective.
8 posted on 01/19/2007 11:42:58 AM PST by JamesP81 (If you have to ask permission from Uncle Sam, then it's not a right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
The pornos will never allow it because people will be able to block access to the sites.

Did you read the article?
I have often asked for an explanation by anybody of the position of the conservative family groups as in
"But in May 2006, the organization voted against a contract with domain distributor ICM Registry, in part because of outcry from conservative family groups."

That position has always been mind-bending illogical to me!

9 posted on 01/19/2007 11:46:43 AM PST by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy

Do you think - for one minute - that all the porn sites now at .com and .net will all go away and happily move to .XXX-ville?

No chance.

Porn sites like whitehouse.com will NEVER EVER leave such a lucrative address.

And if given the chance to increase their filth though .XXX, and stay at .com, then you know they will.

.XXX is a bad idea. It will only increase the number of porn websites.


10 posted on 01/19/2007 11:53:40 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
people will be able to block access to the sites.

Bet me.

Bet me five whole dollars.

Do you seriously think that kids (and others) won't be trading IP NUMBERS within two days of such a move?

The domain name is translated into an IP number, and that's how the computers actually communicate.

11 posted on 01/19/2007 12:00:25 PM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
.XXX is a bad idea. It will only increase the number of porn websites.

Two questions:

(1) How will it increase the number of porn sites?

(2) Why does it matter if the new sites are identified by the .XXX domain?

12 posted on 01/19/2007 12:04:51 PM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Porn sites like whitehouse.com will NEVER EVER leave such a lucrative address.

.XXX is a bad idea. It will only increase the number of porn websites.

Which is it?
Logic and common sense isn't your strong suit, is it.

Just the fact that ISPs would be able to choose to block all XXX sites for their customers will simplify things enormously for people who prefer not having to deal with it at all. And it expands individual choice.
Everybody wins.

13 posted on 01/19/2007 12:07:09 PM PST by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
The domain name is translated into an IP number, and that's how the computers actually communicate.

Which is easier to block as a list on a server? IP numbers or multiple names assigned to a specific IP number?

Just wondering...

14 posted on 01/19/2007 12:09:24 PM PST by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Logophile

Answers.

1. I have a porn site at .com and now I have one at .XXX. I've doubled my # of porn sites. This will happen at millions of sites.

2. If there are no .XXX sites, then fine it won't matter. But if this new domain is opened up for porn, then guess what. More porn will infiltrate the internet. Block it if you will, but will that detract some pervert who will view it, and then molest some child?

.XXX is a bad idea.


15 posted on 01/19/2007 12:12:44 PM PST by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

So you believe .XXX will benefit everyone?

Naive.


16 posted on 01/19/2007 12:14:38 PM PST by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

I want to see a Walla Walla Washington domain. Dot www.


17 posted on 01/19/2007 12:16:56 PM PST by yawningotter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd
Country after country needs to make it law that all porn sites on servers in their country have to be registered as .XXX

Should have been done years ago.

Spam next.

18 posted on 01/19/2007 12:21:59 PM PST by free_life
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
If you're talking about blocking IP NUMBERS, at the ISP level, then the XXX idea adds nothing new. You can do that already.

But if people think that having their kid's computer set up to block *.xxx is going to work, I'm betting against it.

Oh, it might prevent a few accidents, like if Whitehouse.com was forced to move to Whitehouse.xxx, but that's about it.

19 posted on 01/19/2007 12:23:22 PM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

Although I worry about kids getting to porn sites, I am more worried about porn sites using common addresses to lure people into porn sites like the people who used to run whitehouse.com used to do. Your kid mistypes "microsoft" and suddenly he is awash in porn.

Move the porn off the main hallway.


20 posted on 01/19/2007 12:29:22 PM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
The best way to protect kids is to set up a firewall that ONLY allows access to specific parent-approved web sites.

This works much better than trying to narrow down millions of web sites to "just the good ones".
21 posted on 01/19/2007 12:43:39 PM PST by politicket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Your kid mistypes "microsoft" and suddenly he is awash in porn.

Tell me about it.

We have a sporting goods store in our area called "Dick's Sporting Goods" (it's a chain). My wife wanted to order something they didn't have in the store and went to www.dicks.com. It was NOT the site she was looking for, and of course it was one of those that immediately launched a whole slew of other windows. LOL

It's been kind of a funny story to tell though. At least it wasn't the kids.

22 posted on 01/19/2007 12:50:10 PM PST by BlueMondaySkipper (The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: politicket

My kids computer only allows them to use permissable websites. I have to give permission. It's a pain tho. And they can get on my computer which has no such limits.

All I want to do is be able to say "no porn" but the porn industry hates that idea. Imagine that.


23 posted on 01/19/2007 1:00:41 PM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: lpeterboyd

Why do they need XXX? Doesn't .org stand for orgasm?


24 posted on 01/19/2007 1:05:55 PM PST by gcruse (http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

The ISP's nameserver can easily block DNS lookup for all .XXX domains. It's simple, one entry and all the .XXX domains go away for that ISP's users. It doesn't stop everything -- or even that much, but it is something.

Sure, you can still get to the site through it's IP address, but finding the IP will take research.

Personally, I think the objection from the right is that .XXX domains legitimize online pornography. Once there is a porn domain, porn has been sanctioned as an official and accepted part of the net.


25 posted on 01/19/2007 1:10:28 PM PST by MediaMole (9/11 - We have already forgotten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Oh, I know you love this topic...


26 posted on 01/19/2007 1:11:16 PM PST by Registered (Politics is the art of the possible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

ping


27 posted on 01/19/2007 1:12:15 PM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Why would the "conservative family groups" oppose this?

Because they live in a fantasy world and actually think they will somehow be able to make all the naughty pictures magically go away. It's like being against sending troops to Iraq because you want to just nuke 'em all.

28 posted on 01/19/2007 1:17:34 PM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
1. I have a porn site at .com and now I have one at .XXX. I've doubled my # of porn sites. This will happen at millions of sites.

Nonsense. Two different names can, and often do, refer to one and the same site.

29 posted on 01/19/2007 1:20:05 PM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
Personally, I think the objection from the right is that .XXX domains legitimize online pornography.

Once again, I'd like to thank these idiots for helping to save me from myself.

30 posted on 01/19/2007 1:21:40 PM PST by Wormwood (Your Friendly Neighborhood Moderate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Registered
Yeah, the dot-xxx domain is strictly a marketing gimmick for pornographers. It's virtually useless for filtering purposes, and it's a lousy solution from a network engineering standpoint.

The best solution would have been to reserve a range of IP addresses which would allow routers to efficiently block access (at least until the kids figured out how to configure their web browser to use a proxy server). An IP-based solution would also withstand the inevitable court challenges, in my opinion. But it's too late now.

31 posted on 01/19/2007 1:26:37 PM PST by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: lpeterboyd

This is to go with the new .zzz domain for especially boring sites.


34 posted on 01/19/2007 1:32:06 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logophile
I would favor the idea enthusiastically if there could be some way to require that all pornographers to register under the .XXX domain name. As you said, that would give people an easy way to block porn sites.

I'm certain that such a TLD-based requirement would be struck down as unconstitutional, based on the previous rulings. But a law requiring porno sites to be restricted to a numerical range of IP-addresses might stand a chance. It could be a sort of IPv6 "red light district" that could be blocked efficiently.

35 posted on 01/19/2007 1:45:56 PM PST by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy

Because they live in a delusional world where they think they can make porn go away. By having the .xxx domain, it means there will be more porn and that must be opposed at all costs, even if it has no real effect on the big picture of internet porn as a whole.


36 posted on 01/19/2007 1:58:46 PM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
You might consider password protecting your computer from your kids.

Yes, it is a pain - but a necessary one for our children's sake.
37 posted on 01/19/2007 8:42:27 PM PST by politicket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: politicket

Sounds a bit like blaming the victim to me


38 posted on 01/20/2007 6:18:24 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; chance33_98; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Bush2000; PenguinWry; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; ...

39 posted on 01/20/2007 11:47:42 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Which is easier to block as a list on a server? IP numbers or multiple names assigned to a specific IP number?

The problem is that blocking a specific IP address would not be effective. And since porn sites are often hosted by legitimate web providers, blocking ranges of IP addresses is likely to block access to sites you actually want to visit.

Plus, the management overhead would be burdensome. Better to each proper behavior, IMO.

40 posted on 01/20/2007 12:57:26 PM PST by Doohickey (I am not unappeasable. YOU are just too easily appeased.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

My daughter (who was 11 at the time) and I went online to look for accessories for her MyScene Barbie and when we googled it a whole list of porno sites came up as choices. That really scared me silly.


41 posted on 01/20/2007 1:00:12 PM PST by brwnsuga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: John Williams

and that is the issue here - who decides, who FORCES, a particular site to be placed into the XXX domain. the government?

Just look at FR, some people here think Hooters restaurants are "porn". Does their website get forced to the XXX domain?


42 posted on 01/20/2007 1:04:39 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson