Question about everyone's extreme hatred towards .xxx - GoFuckYourself.com

campimp · 07-02-2011, 09:13 PM

I rarely follow too much the news on this forum. I have been an affiliate for a couple of the big webcam sites for several years, and basically just build as many sites as possible to promote these programs, so since i am not a program owner, or big player, I tend to just focus on my sites, and never attend shows, or anything like that.

i do OK (at least in my mind) and have consistently earned between 5 and 7K a month for the past 5 years.

My question is ... Why does everyone hate .xxx so much, and what impact does .xxx have on someone like me who is just a program affiliate and not a program owner?

just curious due to all the nalem drama that has arisen over the past few days

thanks

porno jew · 07-02-2011, 09:16 PM

because nalem takes pics for them.

campimp · 07-02-2011, 09:18 PM

actually i just found the thread baddog posted with that .xxx video, i will watch and maybe get some answers there...

just mostly curious how it will effect affiliates for the big programs

epitome · 07-02-2011, 09:24 PM

It doesn't matter if you're a program or an affiliate, Stuart Lawley wants to fuck you in the ass without lube.

It's a money grab and provides no known benefit to the industry or surfers.

Their mantra is its for protecting children, but parents should already have filtering software setup and site owners should already be voluntarily labeling their sites with RTA.

The fear is that ICM/.XXX will lobby to make the extension required for any adult site. We'd then be forced to pay ICM's crazy high reg fees. Another fear is that nations will start blocking .XXX altogether since all adult sites (both paysites and freesites) will be lumped together. Super easy to block ISP or nationwide.

DBS.US · 07-02-2011, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by campimp

I basically just build as many sites as possible

Try building one great site that gets bookmarked and returning users.

charlie g · 07-02-2011, 09:45 PM

The biggest problem I have with the extension (besides the underhanded way it was hammered through) is it is an initial step towards censorship of online adult entertainment. If .xxx does become manditory for adult sites, it becomes very easy for countries/states/communities to block. Freedom of choice goes out the window and the customer pie becomes smaller and smaller.

The only winners are the bible thumpers and the good folks at .xxx

.

L-Pink · 07-02-2011, 09:49 PM

You can purchase a domain on godaddy right now for a couple of bucks. Compare that to what xxx charges. Imagine what xxx will charge if you don't have a choice ......

.

raymor · 07-02-2011, 10:37 PM

Note that they've tried over and over to get .xxx every year and for about ten years it got shot down, until they finally found the right palms to grease.
To many of us, it's clear that before long politicians will seize the opportunity and Obama has already put out feelers. Just as movies and video games have labels about content ratings, they say, sites that are "not appropriate for children" should be forced to use the .xxx ?label". Aside from actual porn sites, who will lose their investment in building traffic to their .com, politicians in the past have defined "not appropriate for children" to mean kids under 13. So if your site has any content that the government thinks is too mature for a 12 year old, you're stuck with the .xxx label and blocking.
Some people say that won't happen in places like the US, but remember Clinton signed THREE major internet censorship laws, CDA, CDA II, and COPPA. Obamas comments about "controlling the internet" the same week that .xxx was approved suggest he's no more a friend of freedom than Clinton.

InfoGuy · 07-02-2011, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlie g

The only winners are the bible thumpers and the EVIL folks at .xxx

I fixed your quote for you.

DaddyHalbucks · 07-02-2011, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

It doesn't matter if you're a program or an affiliate, Stuart Lawley wants to fuck you in the ass without lube.

It's a money grab and provides no known benefit to the industry or surfers.

Their mantra is its for protecting children, but parents should already have filtering software setup and site owners should already be voluntarily labeling their sites with RTA.

The fear is that ICM/.XXX will lobby to make the extension required for any adult site. We'd then be forced to pay ICM's crazy high reg fees. Another fear is that nations will start blocking .XXX altogether since all adult sites (both paysites and freesites) will be lumped together. Super easy to block ISP or nationwide.

Good summary.

Chosen · 07-03-2011, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

The fear is that ICM/.XXX will lobby to make the extension required for any adult site. We'd then be forced to pay ICM's crazy high reg fees. Another fear is that nations will start blocking .XXX altogether since all adult sites (both paysites and freesites) will be lumped together. Super easy to block ISP or nationwide.

What he said

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlie g

The biggest problem I have with the extension (besides the underhanded way it was hammered through) is it is an initial step towards censorship of online adult entertainment. If .xxx does become manditory for adult sites, it becomes very easy for countries/states/communities to block. Freedom of choice goes out the window and the customer pie becomes smaller and smaller.

The only winners are the bible thumpers and the good folks at .xxx

Why shouldn't online porn be censored like offline porn is?

If .xxx becomes mandatory and the major buying countries do block it. Then offline porn porn will flourish again. And I'm sure all you clever people will be able to make a living in offline porn instead.

The US, and EU won't block it, even if mandatory. If the price for a .xxx rockets, it might mean a lot of small fish will get eaten up. And that's the most likely scenario. Try fighting the big coffers of companies like Manwin.

If it was likely to take porn off the Internet, Private, Hustler, Wicked and a host of other offline companies would be behind it. It's business.

IMO it's another thing to scare the cowards who work in the online porn business. There has to be something for these guys to get their knickers in a twist over, this time it's .xxx.

DamianJ · 07-03-2011, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Why shouldn't online porn be censored like offline porn is?

1) The internet is global
2) Censorship is bad (this week it's CP, next week it's your "teen" site taken off line with no due process)
3) There is no way technical way to effectively censor porn, hence attempts to do so result in sexual health education sites getting blocked, rape advice etc
4) Freedom of speech
5) 1st amendment
6) It's not about protecting anyone, it's about control

If you want censorship, set up shop in China

HTH

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 05:54 AM

Sorry mixed up the threads.

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

1) The internet is global
2) Censorship is bad (this week it's CP, next week it's your "teen" site taken off line with no due process)
3) There is no way technical way to effectively censor porn, hence attempts to do so result in sexual health education sites getting blocked, rape advice etc
4) Freedom of speech
5) 1st amendment
6) It's not about protecting anyone, it's about control

If you want censorship, set up shop in China

HTH

1) Yes it's global, is that news?

2) Censorship of porn is a fact of life, live with it. Offline porn is censored. so why not online porn? Are you saying CP shouldn't be censored online?

3) There's no way to stop bank robbers, so will they not bother to try?

4) Which will protect you.

5) See 4)

6) Yes we live in a world with controls. Welcome to the real world.

China remark is stupid.

I've lived with censorship in porn since before you had hairs around your balls. And made a lot of money in the business. It's something I've had to deal with and yet still profit. At the moment any kid can log onto Pornhub and watch things that are not suitable, that will not last for ever and don't kid yourself it will. Saying parents should protect their own children is stupid. Are they also expected to protect them from everything without the Governments implementing laws?

No law is 100%, but it's every Governments duty to do what they can. Live with it.

Because the last people anyone will take any real notice of, on this matter, is pornographers. Or any matter.

Tasty1 · 07-03-2011, 06:12 AM

Don't want them
Don't need them
Can do harm to us
Costing me money
It is only for the $$$$$
I will adapt when necessary

iamtam · 07-03-2011, 06:13 AM

the .xxx people claim to represent us as an industry. its just not true. when they are not honest about the basic facts, imagine what else they are lying and scamming about.

DamianJ · 07-03-2011, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I've lived with censorship in porn since before you had hairs around your balls. And made a lot of money in the business. It's something I've had to deal with and yet still profit. At the moment any kid can log onto Pornhub and watch things that are not suitable, that will not last for ever and don't kid yourself it will. Saying parents should protect their own children is stupid. Are they also expected to protect them from everything without the Governments implementing laws?

It's so funny to hear a pornographer who doesn't understand the internet argue in FAVOUR of censorship.

Bless you Paul, you're funny.

Glad the "publisher" for your "ebook" gave you an extension in order to post stuff like this.

sarettah · 07-03-2011, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

6) It's not about protecting anyone, it's about control

What he said

Barry-xlovecam · 07-03-2011, 07:09 AM

As long as .xxx remains voluntary there really is no problem in it ? if you don't want to segregate your content into a TLD that is easily blocked by ISPs and/or governmental authorities and then further regulated by ICM registry and IFFOR ;

IFFOR Policy Council and Policy Development Process PDF

Meet your new Master ... If they don't like how you do things they pull the plug on your online business ...

This might add a layer of bureaucracy at best to any website that you would develop.

If you want a "Family Safe," self censored Internet you should be able to buy such a package from your ISP. Why isn't this available? Rhetorical question ? there must be real market (ROI) in this service and they cannot sell the dead fish ...

BlackCrayon · 07-03-2011, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

1) Yes it's global, is that news?

2) Censorship of porn is a fact of life, live with it. Offline porn is censored. so why not online porn? Are you saying CP shouldn't be censored online?

3) There's no way to stop bank robbers, so will they not bother to try?

4) Which will protect you.

5) See 4)

6) Yes we live in a world with controls. Welcome to the real world.

China remark is stupid.

I've lived with censorship in porn since before you had hairs around your balls. And made a lot of money in the business. It's something I've had to deal with and yet still profit. At the moment any kid can log onto Pornhub and watch things that are not suitable, that will not last for ever and don't kid yourself it will. Saying parents should protect their own children is stupid. Are they also expected to protect them from everything without the Governments implementing laws?

No law is 100%, but it's every Governments duty to do what they can. Live with it.

Because the last people anyone will take any real notice of, on this matter, is pornographers. Or any matter.

no one is censoring my cable. there is hardcore porn after 9 on the movie channels. i don't pay for porn to be there but there it is. much like the internet, you have to take responsibility and make sure impressionable dependents don't view inappropriate material.

Grapesoda · 07-03-2011, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

The fear is that ICM/.XXX will lobby to make the extension required for any adult site. We'd then be forced to pay ICM's crazy high reg fees. Another fear is that nations will start blocking .XXX altogether since all adult sites (both paysites and freesites) will be lumped together. Super easy to block ISP or nationwide.

yes this is the concept

Redrob · 07-03-2011, 08:20 AM

I don't like the conflict with existing trademarks. I either have to register my site with .XXX and park it; or, they can give the URL to someone else who will compete with my existing .com site and sell similar products and services using my trademarked name and I will have to hire a lawyer.

Either way, parking the domain or paying for a lawyer, I pay and receive no benefit for my business.

topnotch, standup guy · 07-03-2011, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Why shouldn't online porn be censored like offline porn is?

If .xxx becomes mandatory and the major buying countries do block it. Then offline porn porn will flourish again. And I'm sure all you clever people will be able to make a living in offline porn instead.

The US, and EU won't block it, even if mandatory. If the price for a .xxx rockets, it might mean a lot of small fish will get eaten up. And that's the most likely scenario. Try fighting the big coffers of companies like Manwin.

If it was likely to take porn off the Internet, Private, Hustler, Wicked and a host of other offline companies would be behind it. It's business.

IMO it's another thing to scare the cowards who work in the online porn business. There has to be something for these guys to get their knickers in a twist over, this time it's .xxx.

Wow, you're getting uglier by the day aren't you?

You used to be occasionally relevant (or better) and at worst mildly annoying . . . but no more.

Now you're just a spiteful, venomous old man who's fondest wish is to impart his bitterness and misery upon all and sundry.

Not sure if it was the magician's trolling that finally got to you or perhaps it was those two Russian house guests from hell but whatever, you've finally lost it. Entirely.

As Pete Townshend once wrote; I hope I die before I get old.

.

Rochard · 07-03-2011, 08:24 AM

Paul Markham, you get stupider every fucking day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Censorship of porn is a fact of life, live with it. Offline porn is censored. so why not online porn? Are you saying CP shouldn't be censored online?

CP isn't censored in any way shape or form. It's illegal. It's a crime. Staggering difference there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I've lived with censorship in porn since before you had hairs around your balls. And made a lot of money in the business. It's something I've had to deal with and yet still profit. At the moment any kid can log onto Pornhub and watch things that are not suitable, that will not last for ever and don't kid yourself it will. Saying parents should protect their own children is stupid. Are they also expected to protect them from everything without the Governments implementing laws?

Yes, and we've been fighting censorship in porn since before YOU had hairs on your balls.

Imagine waking up one day and no one can view porn on line. All porn is regulated to XXX - and very few people can see XXX. Most countries will block them. All businesses, government agencies, and colleges will block them. Entire ISPs will block them, making them "opt in". Cities will be able to block them because they voted to "not allow porn come in to their community via the Internet".

At this point, only a small percentage of people will be able to see online porn - and the entire adult community will fold.

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

no one is censoring my cable. there is hardcore porn after 9 on the movie channels. i don't pay for porn to be there but there it is. much like the internet, you have to take responsibility and make sure impressionable dependents don't view inappropriate material.

Yes someone does censor your cable porn, unless you can see CP on it.

You don't pay for cable????

Yes you have to take responsibility to make sure impressionable dependents don't view inappropriate material. So does the Government. We don't live in a world where we all take care of ourselves, that's not possible. Think it through without the threat to your wallet.

Whether the Government passes laws or doesn't concerning censorship is something we have no say in. Never has been different and never will be different.

Damian wants no censorship on the Internet, who agrees with him?

There's no middle ground, the Internet is subject to the laws of the land or it's not. you can't pick and choose the laws you like and those you don't.

.xxx is here, live with it. Don't lose sweat over what you can't effect.

Grapesoda · 07-03-2011, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Paul Markham, you get stupider every fucking day.

CP isn't censored in any way shape or form. It's illegal. It's a crime. Staggering difference there.

Imagine waking up one day and no one can view porn on line. All porn is regulated to XXX - and very few people can see XXX. Most countries will block them. All businesses, government agencies, and colleges will block them. Entire ISPs will block them, making them "opt in". Cities will be able to block them because they voted to "not allow porn come in to their community via the Internet".

there will be a big jump is sex crimes

campimp · 07-03-2011, 08:37 AM

after watching that video that baddog posted from the YNOT conference i understand it much better now.

i agree with barry, as long as it does not become mandatory i dont see it effecting affiliate business too much.... but i also see how it could be a big pain in the ass for people with existing trademarks as Redrob mentioned.

for my approach towards business, which is build as many sites as possible i see the cost of owning so many domains being the being problem if it becomes mandatory

thanks for everyone's input

BlackCrayon · 07-03-2011, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Yes someone does censor your cable porn, unless you can see CP on it.

You don't pay for cable????

Yes you have to take responsibility to make sure impressionable dependents don't view inappropriate material. So does the Government. We don't live in a world where we all take care of ourselves, that's not possible. Think it through without the threat to your wallet.

Whether the Government passes laws or doesn't concerning censorship is something we have no say in. Never has been different and never will be different.

Damian wants no censorship on the Internet, who agrees with him?

There's no middle ground, the Internet is subject to the laws of the land or it's not. you can't pick and choose the laws you like and those you don't.

.xxx is here, live with it. Don't lose sweat over what you can't effect.

What does CP have to do with this discussion? Porn is not illegal, CP is. My point was that the porn is not being put behind a locked door right on your television, why should it be for the internet?

And yes, I pay for cable, just like I pay for internet access, from the same company actually.

I grew up before the internet and that did not stop me in any way from accessing porn in my teens. I bought cigarettes from the corner store at 13 years old. Had friends buy me alcohol, etc, etc, etc. In the end my parents did more to *try* and curb that behavior than any government regulation ever did.

BlackCrayon · 07-03-2011, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redrob

I don't like the conflict with existing trademarks. I either have to register my site with .XXX and park it; or, they can give the URL to someone else who will compete with my existing .com site and sell similar products and services using my trademarked name and I will have to hire a lawyer.

Either way, parking the domain or paying for a lawyer, I pay and receive no benefit for my business.

Not to mention those with six figure daily traffic numbers who don't have trademarks who are going to have to fight it out in an auction just to get their .xxx version (if they want it)..

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Paul Markham, you get stupider every fucking day.

Then make a coherent reply.

Quote:

CP isn't censored in any way shape or form. It's illegal. It's a crime. Staggering difference there.

The production is illegal. The publication is a form of censorship.

Quote:

Yes, and we've been fighting censorship in porn since before YOU had hairs on your balls.

Sorry but you're wrong. Pornographers never had a fight against porn censorship. They couldn't have any effect and knew it. The fight against censorship and media control is a different thing and that's being fought against. A fight I HAVE been involved in.

Quote:

Imagine waking up one day and no one can view porn on line. All porn is regulated to XXX - and very few people can see XXX. Most countries will block them. All businesses, government agencies, and colleges will block them. Entire ISPs will block them, making them "opt in". Cities will be able to block them because they voted to "not allow porn come in to their community via the Internet".

And offline porn will flourish. Are you saying you can't work in offline porn?

Quote:

and the entire adult community will fold

Stupid remark. Don't even need to explain why.

My point is none of you have a say in the matter. you can bleat and complain but your pissing into the wind. No one cares what you think when it comes to online censorship of porn. Live with it.

Ever since I joined the online porn community I have watched you guys bleat about things that scared you. It was 2257, then Acacia, then pornographers getting dragged into court for publishing porn they should know better about, now it's .xxx. And all the while the business has made huge mistakes and it's devastation offline was inevitably going to happen onlne.

Now you bleat over .xxx and scared this big bad bogey man might stop you making money. He hasn't done nearly as well as you've done doing that to yourselves.

And all you can do is throw insults and make stupid replies.

Who do you, honestly think, is taking notice of you?

Paul Markham · 07-03-2011, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

Not to mention those with six figure daily traffic numbers who don't have trademarks who are going to have to fight it out in an auction just to get their .xxx version (if they want it)..

What will be the point of buying a TLD that will be worthless?

If there's no porn online, there's no .xxx.

Make up your mind guys.

Seems some think a .xxx TLD will be too expensive for them and some think it will be worthless.

And those 6 figure domains prove how you fucked up online porn. If it takes 100,000 people to look at your product for a few to buy. Then you screwed up. Well it might soon be 7 figure domains, with or without .xxx

DamianJ · 07-03-2011, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Damian wants no censorship on the Internet, who agrees with him?

There's no middle ground, the Internet is subject to the laws of the land or it's not. you can't pick and choose the laws you like and those you don't.

.xxx is here, live with it. Don't lose sweat over what you can't effect.

Everyone agrees with me Paul, bless you.

Honestly, no one that produces pornography in the world aside from you thinks censorship is good.

DamianJ · 07-03-2011, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

What will be the point of buying a TLD that will be worthless?

If there's no porn online, there's no .xxx.

Make up your mind guys.

Seems some think a .xxx TLD will be too expensive for them and some think it will be worthless.

And those 6 figure domains prove how you fucked up online porn. If it takes 100,000 people to look at your product for a few to buy. Then you screwed up. Well it might soon be 7 figure domains, with or without .xxx

You don't understand at all, do you?

.xxx is just a money making exercise. No government has agreed to do anything with them. It is just a couple of guys trying to make a lot of money.

Like .mobi, some people will buy the domains, some won't. It will all go away.

But you don't really *get* domains at all, do you?

http://www.paulmarkhamteens.co.uk

:D

BlackCrayon · 07-03-2011, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

What will be the point of buying a TLD that will be worthless?

If there's no porn online, there's no .xxx.

Make up your mind guys.

Seems some think a .xxx TLD will be too expensive for them and some think it will be worthless.

And those 6 figure domains prove how you fucked up online porn. If it takes 100,000 people to look at your product for a few to buy. Then you screwed up. Well it might soon be 7 figure domains, with or without .xxx

I'm not going to bother buying any but people like thehun might want hun.xxx or thehun.xxx. someone is going to buy it and no doubt pay a lot of money for it. domain speculators can be pretty dumb. someone bought nissan.asia, a well known trademark on a useless, worthless tld for six figures. why? who knows but I don't doubt the .xxx will be similar. Why don't you respond to my other post?

u-Bob · 07-03-2011, 08:58 AM

1. The company behind the .xxx stld: The ICM Registry has lied about almost everything.

2. The .xxx tld is an stld, not and gtld. An Stld is a so called sponsored tld. The ICM Registry lied to ICANN and claimed that it represented the adult industry and that the adult industry wanted the creation of this new tld.

3. The approval of the .xxx tld was delayed for several years thanks to the strong opposition from the adult industry. The ICM was only able to get it approved after they had promised certain people in key position in ICANN a new (highpaying) job.

4. In the past Senator Max Bachus has introduced legislation to mandate that all adult companied move from .com to .xxx. This attempt at censorship failed because amongst other reasons it was deemed technically impossible. Now that a .xxx tld exists, those looking to censor the web may be encouraged to try again.

Funny side note: ever since we confronted the ICM Registry with this, the wikipedia page about .xxx has been edited on a regular basis to remove any mention of senator Bachus.

5. The ICM Registry has every incentive to lobby to make the use of .xxx domains mandatory. They even set up office in DC... guess why...

6. .xxx domains add no value. DotCom is king and will always be king. Just look at other failed tlds: .mobi, .travel, .aero,...

7. .xxx domains add costs and possible risks to the way we do business. The ICM Registry is promoting the .xxx tld as "the home of responsible adult companies", there by implying that .com based adult sites are somehow not reliable.

The chances that any government will ever be able to make the use of .xxx domains mandatory are very small, thanks to the technical and practical difficulties to enforce is. However, potential technical and practical problems have never stopped politicians (who generally lack the understanding of how the internet works) to try and regulate things and cause a lot of problems along the way.

It is important to show that the ICM does not represent us. It is important to show that you do not consider the ICM to be part of this industry by refusing to do business with them.

It is important to keep exposing their lies.

It is important to not give them any money. Any $ you spend on a .xxx domain is a $ the ICM will be able to use against you.

marlboroack · 07-03-2011, 08:58 AM

I touch myself.

u-Bob · 07-03-2011, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

I'm not going to bother buying any but people like thehun might want hun.xxx or thehun.xxx. someone is going to buy it and no doubt pay a lot of money for it.

First of all, the mere existence of a thehun.xxx domain does not mean it will instantly be flooded with visitors.

Secondly, the hun can just go after the owner of thehun.xxx for trademark infringement. There is no reason whatsoever for the Hun to defensively register thehun.xxx.

BlackCrayon · 07-03-2011, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-Bob

First of all, the mere existence of a thehun.xxx domain does not mean it will instantly be flooded with visitors.

Secondly, the hun can just go after the owner of thehun.xxx for trademark infringement. There is no reason whatsoever for the Hun to defensively register thehun.xxx.

I totally agree. I don't know if the hun has a trademark or not? I know I've never thought to (or ever really wanted to) trademark the names of any of my sites.

If you judge by the types of domains registered during previous tld releases, every kind of *brand* will be bought by speculators. Some of them have deep pockets with very little knowledge of how they will profit from it..typically they don't..but for every one of those who fails and loses a shitload of money there is another fool ready to take his place.

Barry-xlovecam · 07-03-2011, 09:11 AM

Decide which domains are worth the expense of trademark I guess ... If some domains are not worth protecting with trademark and paying the $200 bribe err protection money err fee to ICM to exclude them from .xxx take your chances ...

Barry-xlovecam · 07-03-2011, 09:24 AM

As for censorship for child protection under US laws ...

Quote:

U.S. Supreme Court
BUTLER v. MICHIGAN, 352 U.S. 380 (1957)
352 U.S. 380

We have before us legislation not reasonably restricted to the evil with which it is said to deal. The incidence of this enactment is to reduce the adult population of Michigan to reading only what is fit for children. It thereby [352 U.S. 380, 384] arbitrarily curtails one of those liberties of the individual, now enshrined in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, that history has attested as the indispensable conditions for the maintenance and progress of a free society. We are constrained to reverse this conviction.

Reversed.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK concurs in the result.

baddog · 07-03-2011, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

As for censorship for child protection under US laws ...

Proof the system of checks and balances works.

Tasty1 · 07-03-2011, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-Bob

Secondly, the hun can just go after the owner of thehun.xxx for trademark infringement. There is no reason whatsoever for the Hun to defensively register thehun.xxx.

But that would cost more money than registering it.

There are 1001 domainers that don't know about copyright and just register it cause the domain is available. Some of those domainers are in Russia and you have to find them or start a procedure with ICM? Over and over again?

I have 10 domains i don't have a trademark on. The .com / .net .eu where taken by others. I got them from quarantaine when they dumped it after some years. So 650 euro for domains i don't want to use. And there are people with more than 200+ domains that want to protect them, but not use them. I could have bought whole Paul Markham's content for that 650 euros.

ShellyCrash · 07-03-2011, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Why shouldn't online porn be censored like offline porn is?

Last time I checked no one had the ability to block me from accessing my offline porn wherever / whenever I choose. That's part of the problem.

Trust me, if .xxx becomes manditory it will hurt the online adult industry, but that doesn't mean adult will turn back time and bring back the days of glossy magazine pages. It doesn't work that way. We're in the digital era, that's a fact.

spazlabz · 07-03-2011, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

I totally agree. I don't know if the hun has a trademark or not? I know I've never thought to (or ever really wanted to) trademark the names of any of my sites.

If you judge by the types of domains registered during previous tld releases, every kind of *brand* will be bought by speculators. Some of them have deep pockets with very little knowledge of how they will profit from it..typically they don't..but for every one of those who fails and loses a shitload of money there is another fool ready to take his place.

the hun has trademarked it and defended it successfully, so has drbizarro

Barry-xlovecam · 07-03-2011, 10:56 AM

I should clarify the above citation
U.S. Supreme Court
BUTLER v. MICHIGAN, 352 U.S. 380 (1957)
352 U.S. 380

Quote:

Section 343 of the Michigan Penal Code, in effect, makes it a misdemeanor to sell or make available to the general reading public any book containing obscene language "tending to the corruption of the morals of youth." For selling to an adult police officer a book which the trial judge found to have such a potential effect on youth, appellant was convicted of a violation of this section. Held: The statute violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the conviction is reversed. Pp. 380-384.

This does not necessarily preclude the material being made available but subject to a restrictive selling regime ...

epitome · 07-03-2011, 11:07 AM

Why does old man Markham keep talking about .XXX will protect people from CP?

Please point to anything they've published where they have a VIABLE solution of ridding the world of CP through implementing .XXX.

As far as I know, the CP folks don't have snazzy tours and a big biller working for them. It's hidden away from the public eye, but still accessible to those in the know.

NEWSFLASH OLD MAN: CP can reside anywhere on a server, accessible by an IP address only, as can any data. .XXX cannot and will not rid the world of it.

The rest of your arguments are weak at best, just noticed you mentioning CP in every single response... as if that's the problem.

CP is illegal. Real adult webmasters (the one's that would pay for .xxx if forced) are not promoting that, anyway.

epitome · 07-03-2011, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShellyCrash

Last time I checked no one had the ability to block me from accessing my offline porn wherever / whenever I choose. That's part of the problem.

Trust me, if .xxx becomes manditory it will hurt the online adult industry, but that doesn't mean adult will turn back time and bring back the days of glossy magazine pages. It doesn't work that way. We're in the digital era, that's a fact.

He'll never understand that. (or much of anything related to 2011)

Barry-xlovecam · 07-03-2011, 12:02 PM

The CP protections and security provisions of .xxx are all bullshit to sell the scam — that should be obvious to anyone other than a simpleton ...

Herd · 07-03-2011, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Whether the Government passes laws or doesn't concerning censorship is something we have no say in. Never has been different and never will be different.

Your joking right?

If it wasnt for the porn pioneers of the 1970's, none of us in this country would be producing pornography to begin with. People like Larry Flynt had multiple arrests, spent countless millions on legal fees, court appearances and served jail time because of adult magazines deemed obscene by the US GOVT. In the end Flynt won his battles for freedom of speech. As he is still one of the biggest pornographers in the United States.

Because of him, and countless other pornographic innovators of yesteryear, and because of the first amendment, the freedom of speech in this country, Americans can always battle censorship with an opposing Govt.

07-02-2011, 09:13 PM	#1
campimp Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Gamehendge Posts: 1,340	Question about everyone's extreme hatred towards .xxx I rarely follow too much the news on this forum. I have been an affiliate for a couple of the big webcam sites for several years, and basically just build as many sites as possible to promote these programs, so since i am not a program owner, or big player, I tend to just focus on my sites, and never attend shows, or anything like that. i do OK (at least in my mind) and have consistently earned between 5 and 7K a month for the past 5 years. My question is ... Why does everyone hate .xxx so much, and what impact does .xxx have on someone like me who is just a program affiliate and not a program owner? just curious due to all the nalem drama that has arisen over the past few days thanks

07-02-2011, 09:45 PM	#6
charlie g Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Center of the Universe Posts: 2,758	The biggest problem I have with the extension (besides the underhanded way it was hammered through) is it is an initial step towards censorship of online adult entertainment. If .xxx does become manditory for adult sites, it becomes very easy for countries/states/communities to block. Freedom of choice goes out the window and the customer pie becomes smaller and smaller. The only winners are the bible thumpers and the good folks at .xxx . __________________ AlanAgus1 at gmail dot com -------------------------------

07-02-2011, 10:37 PM	#8
raymor Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,745	Note that they've tried over and over to get .xxx every year and for about ten years it got shot down, until they finally found the right palms to grease. To many of us, it's clear that before long politicians will seize the opportunity and Obama has already put out feelers. Just as movies and video games have labels about content ratings, they say, sites that are "not appropriate for children" should be forced to use the .xxx ?label". Aside from actual porn sites, who will lose their investment in building traffic to their .com, politicians in the past have defined "not appropriate for children" to mean kids under 13. So if your site has any content that the government thinks is too mature for a 12 year old, you're stuck with the .xxx label and blocking. Some people say that won't happen in places like the US, but remember Clinton signed THREE major internet censorship laws, CDA, CDA II, and COPPA. Obamas comments about "controlling the internet" the same week that .xxx was approved suggest he's no more a friend of freedom than Clinton. Last edited by raymor; 07-02-2011 at 10:40 PM..

07-03-2011, 05:54 AM	#14
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Sorry mixed up the threads. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70 Last edited by Paul Markham; 07-03-2011 at 05:57 AM..

07-03-2011, 06:12 AM	#16
Tasty1 Judge Jury and Executioner Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: South-America Posts: 9,287	Don't want them Don't need them Can do harm to us Costing me money It is only for the $$$$$ I will adapt when necessary __________________ everything is fake

07-02-2011, 09:16 PM	#2
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	because nalem takes pics for them.

07-02-2011, 09:18 PM	#3
campimp Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Gamehendge Posts: 1,340	actually i just found the thread baddog posted with that .xxx video, i will watch and maybe get some answers there... just mostly curious how it will effect affiliates for the big programs

07-02-2011, 09:24 PM	#4
epitome So Fucking Lame Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: St. Petersburg, FL Posts: 12,156	It doesn't matter if you're a program or an affiliate, Stuart Lawley wants to fuck you in the ass without lube. It's a money grab and provides no known benefit to the industry or surfers. Their mantra is its for protecting children, but parents should already have filtering software setup and site owners should already be voluntarily labeling their sites with RTA. The fear is that ICM/.XXX will lobby to make the extension required for any adult site. We'd then be forced to pay ICM's crazy high reg fees. Another fear is that nations will start blocking .XXX altogether since all adult sites (both paysites and freesites) will be lumped together. Super easy to block ISP or nationwide.

07-02-2011, 09:49 PM	#7
L-Pink working on my tan Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Florida/Kentucky Posts: 39,151	You can purchase a domain on godaddy right now for a couple of bucks. Compare that to what xxx charges. Imagine what xxx will charge if you don't have a choice ...... .

07-03-2011, 06:13 AM	#17
iamtam So Fucking Banned Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,211	the .xxx people claim to represent us as an industry. its just not true. when they are not honest about the basic facts, imagine what else they are lying and scamming about.

07-03-2011, 07:09 AM	#20
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	As long as .xxx remains voluntary there really is no problem in it ? if you don't want to segregate your content into a TLD that is easily blocked by ISPs and/or governmental authorities and then further regulated by ICM registry and IFFOR ; IFFOR Policy Council and Policy Development Process PDF Meet your new Master ... If they don't like how you do things they pull the plug on your online business ... This might add a layer of bureaucracy at best to any website that you would develop. If you want a "Family Safe," self censored Internet you should be able to buy such a package from your ISP. Why isn't this available? Rhetorical question ? there must be real market (ROI) in this service and they cannot sell the dead fish ...

07-03-2011, 08:20 AM	#23
Redrob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks. Posts: 4,790	I don't like the conflict with existing trademarks. I either have to register my site with .XXX and park it; or, they can give the URL to someone else who will compete with my existing .com site and sell similar products and services using my trademarked name and I will have to hire a lawyer. Either way, parking the domain or paying for a lawyer, I pay and receive no benefit for my business. Last edited by Redrob; 07-03-2011 at 08:22 AM..

07-03-2011, 08:37 AM	#28
campimp Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Gamehendge Posts: 1,340	after watching that video that baddog posted from the YNOT conference i understand it much better now. i agree with barry, as long as it does not become mandatory i dont see it effecting affiliate business too much.... but i also see how it could be a big pain in the ass for people with existing trademarks as Redrob mentioned. for my approach towards business, which is build as many sites as possible i see the cost of owning so many domains being the being problem if it becomes mandatory thanks for everyone's input

07-03-2011, 08:58 AM	#36
u-Bob there's no $$$ in porn Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: icq: 195./568.-230 (btw: not getting offline msgs) Posts: 33,063	1. The company behind the .xxx stld: The ICM Registry has lied about almost everything. 2. The .xxx tld is an stld, not and gtld. An Stld is a so called sponsored tld. The ICM Registry lied to ICANN and claimed that it represented the adult industry and that the adult industry wanted the creation of this new tld. 3. The approval of the .xxx tld was delayed for several years thanks to the strong opposition from the adult industry. The ICM was only able to get it approved after they had promised certain people in key position in ICANN a new (highpaying) job. 4. In the past Senator Max Bachus has introduced legislation to mandate that all adult companied move from .com to .xxx. This attempt at censorship failed because amongst other reasons it was deemed technically impossible. Now that a .xxx tld exists, those looking to censor the web may be encouraged to try again. Funny side note: ever since we confronted the ICM Registry with this, the wikipedia page about .xxx has been edited on a regular basis to remove any mention of senator Bachus. 5. The ICM Registry has every incentive to lobby to make the use of .xxx domains mandatory. They even set up office in DC... guess why... 6. .xxx domains add no value. DotCom is king and will always be king. Just look at other failed tlds: .mobi, .travel, .aero,... 7. .xxx domains add costs and possible risks to the way we do business. The ICM Registry is promoting the .xxx tld as "the home of responsible adult companies", there by implying that .com based adult sites are somehow not reliable. The chances that any government will ever be able to make the use of .xxx domains mandatory are very small, thanks to the technical and practical difficulties to enforce is. However, potential technical and practical problems have never stopped politicians (who generally lack the understanding of how the internet works) to try and regulate things and cause a lot of problems along the way. It is important to show that the ICM does not represent us. It is important to show that you do not consider the ICM to be part of this industry by refusing to do business with them. It is important to keep exposing their lies. It is important to not give them any money. Any $ you spend on a .xxx domain is a $ the ICM will be able to use against you.

07-03-2011, 08:58 AM	#37
marlboroack So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: ☣ Posts: 9,327	I touch myself.

07-03-2011, 09:11 AM	#40
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Decide which domains are worth the expense of trademark I guess ... If some domains are not worth protecting with trademark and paying the $200 bribe err protection money err fee to ICM to exclude them from .xxx take your chances ...

07-03-2011, 11:07 AM	#47
epitome So Fucking Lame Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: St. Petersburg, FL Posts: 12,156	Why does old man Markham keep talking about .XXX will protect people from CP? Please point to anything they've published where they have a VIABLE solution of ridding the world of CP through implementing .XXX. As far as I know, the CP folks don't have snazzy tours and a big biller working for them. It's hidden away from the public eye, but still accessible to those in the know. NEWSFLASH OLD MAN: CP can reside anywhere on a server, accessible by an IP address only, as can any data. .XXX cannot and will not rid the world of it. The rest of your arguments are weak at best, just noticed you mentioning CP in every single response... as if that's the problem. CP is illegal. Real adult webmasters (the one's that would pay for .xxx if forced) are not promoting that, anyway.

07-03-2011, 12:02 PM	#49
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	The CP protections and security provisions of .xxx are all bullshit to sell the scam — that should be obvious to anyone other than a simpleton ...