AVN Supports REQUIRING Adult Sites To Operate Under .XXX Domains:

[mikesouth]

from mikesouth.com


AVN Supports REQUIRING Adult Sites To Operate Under .XXX Domains:

Yep you read that right, for all the posturing and obfuscation they are doing on this issue they are selling us out every chance they get witness this:

"Tom Hymes, AVN Online

?There is also a strong case for having a content-specific gTLD (and corresponding SLDs under ccTLDs) such as .xxx or .sex. Sexually explicit services could then be legally required to operate with domain names in this gTLD (or SLD under a ccTLD) that would make it much simpler and easier to control access to such sites to protect children from the whitehouse.com problem, for example. This would not be to impose censorship or restrict free speech, but would restore an effective means for consumer choice which sites like whitehouse.com subvert by exploiting that present ?inherent propensity to confuse?). Similarly, non-commercial sites, including sites for abuse or complaint might usefully be allocated a specific SLD for that purpose.? [9]"

This was taken from a white paper submitted to the National Reseach Council By Jason Hendales, It was also presented to ICANN and others."

Don't believe me? Read it yourself RIGHT HERE

OK Tell me ONE MORE MOTHERFUCKING TIME how you were uninvolved on this issue!

[TheJimmy]

...and why is there no mention of using the already existing ICRA to protect the kids and cordone off adult sites???

It's not like there is a law saying you HAVE to use .xxx for adult sites "YET" and at the same time they write that law, they can include, or if you want to keep your .com and have adult content on it you MUST use the ICRA filter or some other approved filter to add to a page...

a TLD is not the only way to skin the cat they're trying to pelt...

wtfover



Oh yeh, this is about financial gain primarily...

[After Shock Media]

Isnt tom with the FSC now?

[xXxtreme2005]

I hope someone steps up and fights this!

[TheGoldenChild]

Aly I'll accept your apology

:-))

Aly Wrote:
What on earth makes you think that AVN has the power (or inclination) to "sell" webmasters to the highest bidder?! AVN produces adult industry publications and events. It is not some higher power, and it is not a political lobbying organization like the FSC. The fact that AVN didn't take a stand on one side of the issue or the other is, in my opinion, more testament to the organization's integrity than NOT (They COULD have made money but chose not to). Mike and Tony, I'm not saying I disagree with your stand on this but at that time, and still today, our industry was and is divided on .xxx . In my opinion, AVN has a responsibility to write the news, not create it. Any power it has can and is used to actively support organizations like the FSC. However you ascribe far more direct political power and responsibility on AVN than is warranted.

[tony286]

tom responded on another thread about this :

Damn, nice find. I wrote that as a journalist probably five years ago, looking at both sides of the issue, when I still still unclear about the ramifications and what it would all mean. It was theoretical, and had nothing at all to do with this .XXX application. I Always do that when working things through, much the same as I did with 2257, which I might have supported if it were reasonably written and only used if there was a good faith belief that a minor had been used in a production. But that's not how they're written, so I can't support them, and neither do I support .xxx. I had no idea someone had pulled that one paragraph into a white paper to use for that purpose, so shame on them for doing that and shame on me for making an incorrect idea sound so compelling. When I read it now, it's bullshit, but I can't reverse the clock, and my evaluation of these issues has improved in that I think about them far longer before I comment.

Also, Paul Fishbein has stated that he turned the .xxx offer down, so that right there should clarity the AVN position.

The FSC position is the same, and always has been, that it does not now, never has, and never will support a .xxx tld.

[fireorange]

See sig.

[Nicky]

urgh, this .xxx shit is just getting worse.....

[Jace]

Originally Posted by fireorange

See sig.

fuckin loser

[KRL]

I predict 1 million lawsuits if they forced people to migrate to .xxx. And they would lose their asses off.

[Serge Litehead]

...REQUIRING Adult Sites To Operate Under .XXX Domains..

I can see Visa requiring adult to operate under xxx and theHun accepting galleries only from xxx domains.

[Mr Pheer]

I'm not giving up my 200+ .com's for this fuckin .xxx bullshit

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by holograph

I can see Visa requiring adult to operate under xxx and theHun accepting galleries only from xxx domains.

cause we all know galleries are the only way to make money in the adult biz

[Jace]

Originally Posted by simple simon

cause we all know galleries are the only way to make money in the adult biz

they aren't?

[Serge Litehead]

Originally Posted by simple simon

cause we all know galleries are the only way to make money in the adult biz

[Webby]

Originally Posted by holograph

I can see Visa requiring adult to operate under xxx and theHun accepting galleries only from xxx domains.

I'm sure it's well within the sphere of the masterplan holograph :-)

[tony286]

Also Im curious how he can say the FSC never backed this When Larry Walters wrote in the icann comments for it and he is on the board of the FSC if im correct:
[stld-rfp-xxx] A Responsible First Step for the Adult Industry

* To: <stld-rfp-xxx@xxxxxxxxx>
* Subject: [stld-rfp-xxx] A Responsible First Step for the Adult Industry
* From: "Lawrence G. Walters" <larry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
* Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 22:12:42 -0500
* Importance: Normal
* Organization: Weston, Garrou & DeWitt
* Sender: owner-stld-rfp-xxx@xxxxxxxxx

For the good of the adult Internet industry, this proposal should be approved. Having provided legal representation to the adult webmaster community since 1995, along with other facets of the adult industry for years before, I?ve seen many unsuccessful attempts to organize and speak with a united voice. Organizing in the adult Internet industry is essential; just as it is with any other highly-regulated industry. My law firm has represented the adult industry for over 40 years, and has been involved in many organizing efforts. It may be that the only way for this particular facet of the industry to organize is through a non-profit foundation structured to support both the online adult community and the broader Internet community funded through .xxx registration revenue. A .xxx domain name option will eventually become a reality, and the current proposal will result in significant benefit to the industry as a whole, given the significant funding that IFFOR could potentially secure for the purposes of lobbying, legal defense, and media outreach.

When compared to a generic TLD proposal, the current Sponsored TLD proposal is definitely preferable. In light of the current political climate in the United States and elsewhere, IFFOR could become a critical voice for the continued viability and success of the adult website industry. Regardless of one?s feelings concerning the esoteric advisability of a voluntary .xxx domain name registration option, the practical realities must be addressed. Some entity will ultimately convince ICANN to approve a TLD for the adult industry. The current proposal by ICM Registries, Inc., sponsored by IFFOR, will bestow benefits on the industry which far outweigh any of the potential concerns advanced to date. The webmaster community should get behind this proposal which will give something back, instead of waiting for another group to submit a generic TLD proposal based purely on profit motive.

[wjxxx]

see sig

[pornstar2pac]

does AVN own a piece of .xxx or something?

[TheGoldenChild]

Originally Posted by pornstar2pac

does AVN own a piece of .xxx or something?

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/newrep...eply&p=7463320

No AVN doesn't take sides

LOL

[Aly]

Originally Posted by tony404

tom responded on another thread about this :

Damn, nice find. I wrote that as a journalist probably five years ago, looking at both sides of the issue, when I still still unclear about the ramifications and what it would all mean. It was theoretical, and had nothing at all to do with this .XXX application. I Always do that when working things through, much the same as I did with 2257, which I might have supported if it were reasonably written and only used if there was a good faith belief that a minor had been used in a production. But that's not how they're written, so I can't support them, and neither do I support .xxx. I had no idea someone had pulled that one paragraph into a white paper to use for that purpose, so shame on them for doing that and shame on me for making an incorrect idea sound so compelling. When I read it now, it's bullshit, but I can't reverse the clock, and my evaluation of these issues has improved in that I think about them far longer before I comment.

Also, Paul Fishbein has stated that he turned the .xxx offer down, so that right there should clarity the AVN position.

The FSC position is the same, and always has been, that it does not now, never has, and never will support a .xxx tld.

Thanks Tony. I was stuck in LA traffic for a while.

AVN does not and has not supported .xxx . They could have made money but chose not to. I completely understand Mike's position that, in his opinion, AVN should have taken a stronger stand against the proposal, but I stand by my position that that is not what AVN is designed (or should be designed) to do. Also, Tom's editorial back when the .xxx proposal was in it's infancy was just that - an editorial; not the official support of AVN one way or another. Granted, an opposing editorial would have been a good idea too, but I still say it's unfair to somehow hold AVN responsible for .xxx .

[Aly]

Originally Posted by tony404

Also Im curious how he can say the FSC never backed this When Larry Walters wrote in the icann comments for it and he is on the board of the FSC if im correct:

One board member's opinion does not necessarily reflect the decision of the board. Infact it's very healthy to have different opinions on a board.

[Aly]

Originally Posted by pornstar2pac

does AVN own a piece of .xxx or something?

NOT AT ALL.

[Jace]

Aly, i have to say, i admire you...you can really take some shit for AVN, and you seem to have a wonderful head on your shoulders..

maybe one of these days I will see you at a show and buy you a beer

[tony286]

Aly you dont think a trade mag ,that makes money off of trade shows and ads. Should take a position in something that could bring the whole industry down? My father is a insurance guy and when regs changed that would hurt the industry his trade mags took very strong stances. Is it that or big ad buyers are for this so it wipes out the little guy. So avn took a quazi nuetral stance. By the way I got your mag in the three days I will give you a report

[TheGoldenChild]

Originally Posted by Aly_AVN

Thanks Tony. I was stuck in LA traffic for a while.

AVN does not and has not supported .xxx . They could have made money but chose not to. I completely understand Mike's position that, in his opinion, AVN should have taken a stronger stand against the proposal, but I stand by my position that that is not what AVN is designed (or should be designed) to do. Also, Tom's editorial back when the .xxx proposal was in it's infancy was just that - an editorial; not the official support of AVN one way or another. Granted, an opposing editorial would have been a good idea too, but I still say it's unfair to somehow hold AVN responsible for .xxx .

I understand Tom's position in all of this and have spoke to him but at the end of the day...

If I throw a party and a person drowns in my pool..do they sue the pool manufacturer or pool cleaner?

Or the owner of the house?

He may have wrote that years ago, but he wrote it on AVN stationary.

Still doesn't look to good as far as AVN is concerned-
People are entitled to change their opinions and yes, Tom was just a writer back then..

The owners of AVN can only lie so long- the skeletons are coming out of the closet one by one.

They may not even know that Tom was quoted in that White Paper, however ignorance is no excuse.

[TheGoldenChild]

"My law firm has represented the adult industry for over 40 years, and has been involved in many organizing efforts. It may be that the only way for this particular facet of the industry to organize is through a non-profit foundation structured to support both the online adult community and the broader Internet community funded through .xxx registration revenue"

His law firm reps EVERYONE in adult, so he is the voice of all of us?

How many of you have Mr. Walters as your representation?

[tony286]

Originally Posted by kBizzle

I understand Tom's position in all of this and have spoke to him but at the end of the day...

If I throw a party and a person drowns in my pool..do they sue the pool manufacturer or pool cleaner?

Or the owner of the house?

He may have wrote that years ago, but he wrote it on AVN stationary.

Still doesn't look to good as far as AVN is concerned-
People are entitled to change their opinions and yes, Tom was just a writer back then..

The owners of AVN can only lie so long- the skeletons are coming out of the closet one by one.

They may not even know that Tom was quoted in that White Paper, however ignorance is no excuse.

A writer in mag just doesnt get to write whatever he wants someone had to read it and give their approval.

[TheGoldenChild]

Originally Posted by tony404

A writer in mag just doesnt get to write whatever he wants someone had to read it and give their approval.

Thank you for being an intelligent webmaster.

[XPays]

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?r...entry=78127349

[DWB]

am I too late to get a good sig spot?

This whole thing stinks and I don't trust anyone. I'm sure we would be sold out in a second if the $ was right.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by XPays

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?r...entry=78127349

DISSEMINATION OF ADVERTISING OF THE GOODS AND SERVICES OF OTHERS VIA A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK

break that down in normal speak for me

[tony286]

Originally Posted by XPays

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?r...entry=78127349

I guess they are going to have to give a piece of it too, have you told them the good news yet lol

[Jace]

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

am I too late to get a good sig spot?

fucking idiot

[fireorange]

Originally Posted by JaceXXX

fuckin loser

JaceXXX the full-time wannabe DJ part-time webmaster called me a loser, can I sleep tonight?

[Jace]

Originally Posted by fireorange

JaceXXX the full-time wannabe DJ part-time webmaster called me a loser, can I sleep tonight?

i sure hope so

[DWB]

Originally Posted by JaceXXX

fucking idiot

[Jace]

Originally Posted by fireorange

JaceXXX the full-time wannabe DJ part-time webmaster called me a loser, can I sleep tonight?

but i do like your sig

i used to own fuckavn.com, but i let it expire

it would be a damn good time to have that one right now

[Jace]

haha

fuckavn.com is available

[fireorange]

Originally Posted by JaceXXX

fuckavn.com is available

[DWB]

Originally Posted by kBizzle

"My law firm has represented the adult industry for over 40 years, and has been involved in many organizing efforts. It may be that the only way for this particular facet of the industry to organize is through a non-profit foundation structured to support both the online adult community and the broader Internet community funded through .xxx registration revenue"

His law firm reps EVERYONE in adult, so he is the voice of all of us?

How many of you have Mr. Walters as your representation?

I use Louis Sirkin.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by JaceXXX

haha

fuckavn.com is available

fucking idiot

[Jace]

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

fucking idiot

dick drip

[fireorange]

Originally Posted by XPays

http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?r...entry=78127349

So you own the XXX trademark, how do you intend to use it.

[mikesouth]

OK aly I have given you NUMEROUS examples where AVN is on the record supporting this.

Give me an instance where AVN is on the record as against it

[mardigras]

Originally Posted by Aly_AVN

Infact it's very healthy to have different opinions on a board.

Bully you say!

[XPays]

Originally Posted by fireorange

So you own the XXX trademark, how do you intend to use it.

we respect the intellectual property rights of others. forgive me for not making any public comments of substance at the moment on this question.

[TheGoldenChild]

Originally Posted by mikesouth

OK aly I have given you NUMEROUS examples where AVN is on the record supporting this.

Give me an instance where AVN is on the record as against it

[SleazyDream]

I honestly don't see a reason to hammer AVN over this. That's like killing the messanger who brought you bad news.

the reality (from how I see it) is that AVN has clients - and some major ones - that are for the .xxx bullshit, and it would be stupid of them to side 100% against it. Esp if this ends up going though. They also can't take a 100% for it stance too - as it would be unreflective of their client base.

they're in a fense riding position, and they may lean one way or the other depending on how the winds blowing, but they arn't the villan (this time) behind this.

[V_RocKs]

Originally Posted by SleazyDream

I honestly don't see a reason to hammer AVN over this. That's like killing the messanger who brought you bad news.

the reality (from how I see it) is that AVN has clients - and some major ones - that are for the .xxx bullshit, and it would be stupid of them to side 100% against it. Esp if this ends up going though. They also can't take a 100% for it stance too - as it would be unreflective of their client base.

they're in a fense riding position, and they may lean one way or the other depending on how the winds blowing, but they arn't the villan (this time) behind this.

miss you!