GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Most likely within the next 7 days the .XXX TLD will be rejected...... or approved (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=717576)

polish_aristocrat 03-23-2007 12:55 PM
Most likely within the next 7 days the .XXX TLD will be rejected...... or approved
 
all things indicate that we can expect a final vote on the .xxx proposal next week. ICANN is holding a Public Meeting next week in Lisbon, Portugal from Monday 26 March till Friday 30th March. The ICANN Board meets on the last day of the Meeting- so exactly one week from now - and we can expect a final vote then...

this article also sums it up


Vote on '.xxx' Internet address nears

Quote:
NEW YORK -- Online pornographers and religious groups are in a rare alliance as a key Internet oversight agency nears a decision on creating a virtual red-light district through a ".xxx" Internet address.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which has already rejected similar proposals twice since 2000, planned to vote as early as next week on whether to approve the domain name for voluntary use by porn sites.

The decision ultimately could hinge on whether ".xxx" has the support of the adult-entertainment industry - and many porn sites have been strongly opposed.

"One of the criteria is that it (must) have general support among the industry it's supposed to serve, and it does not," said Mark Kernes, a board member with the industry trade group Free Speech Coalition. "I have not met one single webmaster or adult video producer that is in favor of `.xxx,' and I've met a lot of them."

Porn sites are largely concerned that the domain name, while billed as voluntary, would make it easier for governments to later mandate its use and "essentially ghettoize sexual information on the Web," Kernes said.

ICM Registry Inc., the company behind the proposal, has vowed to fight any government efforts to compel its use and cited preregistrations of some 76,000 names as evidence of support. Kernes said many Web sites reserved names simply to prevent someone else from having it.

The Free Speech Coalition believes a domain name for kids-friendly sites would be more appropriate.

Given its voluntary nature, ".xxx" is unlikely to have much effect on parents' ability to block porn sites.



And because a domain name serves merely as an easy-to-remember moniker for a site's actual numeric Internet address, even if a government were to mandate its use, a child could simply punch in the numeric address of any blocked ".xxx" name.

Religious groups worry that ".xxx" would legitimize and expand the number of adults sites, which more than a third of U.S. Internet users visit each month, according to comScore Media Metrix. The Web site measurement firm said 4 percent of all Web traffic and 2 percent of all time spent Web surfing involved an adult site.

"They will keep their `.com' domains, and I have no doubt they will buy their `.xxx' as well," said Patrick Trueman, special counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian public-interest law firm. "There will be twice as much pornography on the Internet."

Trueman and other critics say ICM will be the only beneficiaries.

The startup, founded and funded by four entrepreneurs with backgrounds in domain names and U.K. Internet companies, plans to charge $60 to register a name - 10 times the fees for ".com." Ten dollars of it would go to a companion nonprofit group that would set policies for ".xxx" use and recommend business practices for combating child pornography and promoting child safety.

ICANN tabled and effectively rejected a similar proposal in 2000 out of fear the ".xxx" domain would force the body into content regulation.

ICM resubmitted its proposal in 2004, this time structuring it with a policy-setting organization to free ICANN of that task. But many board members worried that the language of the proposed contract was vague and could kick the task back to ICANN. The board rejected the 2004 proposal last May.

ICANN revived the proposal in January after ICM agreed to hire independent organizations to monitor porn sites' compliance with the new rules, which would be developed by a separate body called the International Foundation for Online Responsibility.

ICM revised it again a month later to clarify ICANN's enforcement abilities and to underscore the independence of the policy-making body.

Despite the vocal opposition, ICM Chairman Stuart Lawley said he preferred a quick vote, adding that the complaints come from "the same people saying the same things time and time again."

"ICM has done more to demonstrate the existence of a strong community than any other application the (ICANN) board has approved," Lawley said. "We have been singled out for special treatment. From the word `go,' ... we were put in the slow lane."

If approved, ICM would be required to help develop mechanisms for promoting child safety and preventing child pornography, and porn sites using ".xxx" would have to participate in a self-rating system, labeling sites based on such criteria as the presence of nudity and whether it is in an artistic or educational context.

ICANN already has discussed the proposal during three, closed-door teleconference meetings this year. It indicated it would be ready to vote at a public meeting next Friday in Lisbon, Portugal.

But delays are possible if ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee raises last-minute objections when it meets next week. Last March, the committee called for stronger language in ICANN's contract with ICM, and Lawley said those points have been addressed in the latest version of the contract.

ICM believes the domain would help the porn industry clean up its act, and Lawley said he has gone through great lengths to put its promises into writing.

"We are confident we have dotted every `i' and crossed every 't,'" he said, "and the contract deserves ratification."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...rnography.html


In my personal opinion common sense will prevail and the .xxx proposal will be rejected, thanks to all the GFY'ers who contributed in this fight :glugglug

tony286 03-23-2007 12:56 PM
from your lips to gods ears, I feel its 70-30 for, currently if icann bought the preregs as approval of it.

JFK 03-23-2007 12:58 PM
Hope it gets Killed for good this time:thumbsup :thumbsup

polish_aristocrat 03-24-2007 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404 (Post 12137319)
from your lips to gods ears, I feel its 70-30 for, currently if icann bought the preregs as approval of it.
well I'm more optimistic....

anyway, we will see in 6 days.....

who 03-24-2007 08:00 AM
I think it will be rejected.

s9ann0 03-24-2007 08:03 AM
i hope its rejected and dies like: http://www.newsfactor.com/news/Judge...d=113007J2MS6H

polish_aristocrat 03-24-2007 08:05 AM
http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/#webcast

looks like the Board Meeting will be webcast


:):):):):)

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE 03-24-2007 08:21 AM
.xxx will die!

Nicky 03-24-2007 08:26 AM
I surely hope it will be rejected

DamageX 03-24-2007 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 12137308)
In my personal opinion common sense will prevail and the .xxx proposal will be rejected, thanks to all the GFY'ers who contributed in this fight :glugglug
I've heard that common sense isn't always that common.

luv$ 03-24-2007 08:34 AM
What are you guys talking about???

.xxx has the ENTIRE ADULT INDUSTRY supporting it!

</sarcasm>

kane 03-24-2007 12:43 PM
it seems to me the only people supporting this are ICM and a few ignorant individuals and ICM is trying to make it look like much of the adult industry supports it since there were a lot of pre-registrations. But you have to think ICANN will understand the the difference between support and covering your ass in case something does happen.

If it has already been struck down twice , I can't see how the third time will be a charm especially when religious groups and even the Bush administration are against it.

porno jew 03-24-2007 12:47 PM
hope it goes through.

polish_aristocrat 03-25-2007 04:58 AM
Recent COPA Ruling Shedding Light on Usefulness of XXX as Voluntary Self Regulatory Vehicle?

Quote:
ICM Registry applauds the decision yesterday of Judge Lowell Reed of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in ACLU v. Gonzales to permanently enjoin enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act ("COPA"). Praising Judge Reed?s meticulously documented opinion, ICM Registry President Stuart Lawley said, ?This continues the unbroken chain of court decisions in the U.S. upholding free expression on the Internet, and it underscores the superiority of voluntary measures that empower users to select content compared with government regulations.? Lawley concluded, ?Now, more than ever, it underscores the need for ICANN to approve the proposal for a voluntary .xxx domain as another alternative to government regulation.?

Judge Reed?s decision permanently enjoins enforcement of COPA, which has never gone into effect since it was adopted by Congress in 1998. The law is intended to prevent children from gaining access to commercial pornography, described as material deemed ?harmful to minors.? But despite the law?s laudable goals, the court found that it violates the First Amendment because it is not narrowly tailored to achieve its objectives. In particular, the government failed to show that the law could be as effective as voluntary measures such as filtering of unwanted content. Finally, the court held that the law was both vague and overly broad.

The court?s analysis of voluntary filtering, based on an extensive record compiled after a month-long trial, demonstrated the futility of government regulations designed to control online speech. It found that ?a significant amount of sexually explicit material on the Internet . . . originates from outside the United States? and that ?COPA has no extra-territorial application . . . unlike Internet content filters which are able to block from view unsuitable material regardless of its origin.? At the same time, it found that voluntary use of filters can block unwanted content 90 to 99% of the time, and, unlike a law, can be tailored to meet the concerns of individual households and customized to meet the needs of different ages within each household.

?These findings fully support the approval by ICANN of the .xxx domain,? Lawley said, ?because doing so would improve the accuracy of voluntary filters and would put in place ?best practices? by adult websites.? He added, ?Not only could a .xxx domain help filters block access by minors to adult content, it could help reduce the rate of overblocking that the court identified.? The court found, for example, that some filtering products, depending on how they were configured, inadvertently blocked non-sexually explicit content up to 33 percent of the time or more. ?The use of more precise labeling by virtue of a .xxx domain, as it has been proposed by ICM Registry, could reduce the incidence of overblocking and serve free speech interests.?

Finally, Lawley noted that the ACLU v Gonzales decision should help allay fears as expressed by some that lawmakers might attempt to create a mandatory domain for adult material. ?Judge Reed?s decision shows that such regulatory approaches are unnecessary, heavy handed, and doomed to failure,? he said. ?Among other things, the decision highlights the fact that any attempt to impose control by legislative fiat is inherently inferior to voluntary marketbased measures that can help parents control access to a global medium in their own homes.? He added, ?This conclusion fully applies to current legislative proposals to impose mandatory labeling requirements.?

Lawley called on ICANN to end its delay and finally approve ICM Registry?s proposal for a voluntary .xxx domain. Failure to do so might well prompt lawmakers to champion additional regulations for the Internet. ?Particularly now, after this further setback in the decadelong battle to implement COPA in the United States, we should focus on ways to make voluntary measures more effective and to move away from damaging and futile regulations.?

http://www.circleid.com/posts/copa_r...lf_regulatory/

NGU 03-25-2007 05:09 AM
Lets hope it gets rejected but it might be a good time to ask what if it is approved what then?

fris 03-25-2007 05:11 AM
cross your fingers

davecummings 03-25-2007 09:00 AM
THis is a bump.

kane 03-25-2007 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGU (Post 12144289)
Lets hope it gets rejected but it might be a good time to ask what if it is approved what then?
well, then all hell breaks loose.

There will be a scramble for the good names and I'm sure many of them are already either preregistered or being held by ICM so they can sell them at a huge price. Following that there will be lawsuits and complaints registered to ICANN because of people squatting on domains. For example if I own a .com and you own the .net of the same name, which, if either, of us has the right to the .xxx? Will ICANN just give them to the .com owner? What if we have both spent a lot of time and money building up our businesses and then the government passes a law forcing all adult sites to use a .xxx and since I have the .com and got the .xxx version of my name I can forward the traffic, but you with the .net are just screwed.

I think the potential headaches of it will be huge and I would imagine some of these questions are things that they will be taking in to consideration when they vote.

FightThisPatent 03-25-2007 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 12144273)
Recent COPA Ruling Shedding Light on Usefulness of XXX as Voluntary Self Regulatory Vehicle?




http://www.circleid.com/posts/copa_r...lf_regulatory/
my posted reply:

This is an absurd argument that ICM has presented in referencing COPA.

Nowhere in history has any sTLD been pitched to be used to filter or block access. ICANN?s expansion of sTLDs was to open up namespaces for the ?sponsored community?.

.XXX has been stated by ICM that it will protect children from adult content, but it has failed to demonstrate how .XXX can do that, when a .XXX extension is VOLUNTARY.

ICM has also stated that .XXX will keep out pedofiles. Today, pedofiles use .COM domains

Why does a registar allow ?lolita? to be used in the domain name?

Suppose that 100,000 adult .COM websites registered .XXX:

1) there are still 100,000 .COM websites that children can find combined with 100,000 .XXX domain names newly added

2) parental filters aren?t install on a childs computer that could block the adult .COM today. There are several free and paid software that can block a large majority of adult sites today.

3) there is easily over 1M adult related domains that the ?protection? comes down to swiss-cheese coverage for the minority of domains that ?voluntarily? use .XXX.

.XXX can only achieve a closer level of protection, if it made mandatory by ICANN or governments.

ICANN could say that all adult related content must move to .XXX and give up its .COM

Governments could say if you are hosted in our country, you are required to move your adult .COM content to .XXX and turn off the .COM

ICM?s profit model is based on the selling of .XXX domains at a premium rate of $60/domain/year.

It would be their most profitable business case that .XXX be used as a mandatory tool.

The applauding of COPA?s enjoinment is a thin vale for what the wizard really wants.

.KIDS TLD combined with simple white-list filtering inclusion in web browsers and search engines is really the best way to truly protect children in addition to good parental controls and interest in their children?s online activities.

Lastly, ASACP.org (Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection), which is an organization funded by adult online entertainment companies, created its own labeling system found at http://www.rtalabel.org which is FREE and can serve as a filtering mechanism for software applications.



Fight the .XXX!

MikeHawk 03-25-2007 11:27 AM
For all you GFY folk that just buried your head in the sand wishing this went away...lets hope it does......

NO NO NO TO .XXX

davecummings 03-25-2007 01:11 PM
This is, IMHO, one of THE most important decisions ever---if .xxx is not denied, the Adult Internet as we know it is going to be badly hurt.

Vote AGAINST .xxx.

Dave

polish_aristocrat 03-26-2007 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FightThisPatent (Post 12145082)
my posted reply
looks like your reply wasn't posted...

davecummings 03-26-2007 02:39 PM
I saw his posting yesterday--it's not on the ICANN site, but rather on the
http://www.circleid.com/posts/copa_r...lf_regulatory/

dave

polish_aristocrat 03-27-2007 01:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by davecummings (Post 12151214)
I saw his posting yesterday--it's not on the ICANN site, but rather on the
http://www.circleid.com/posts/copa_r...lf_regulatory/

dave
ah ok

btw a vote on .xxx can be expected in about 72 hours from now :thumbsup

Dirty F 03-27-2007 01:12 AM
I hope .xxx goes through.

Because you are all a bunch of idiots.

polish_aristocrat 03-27-2007 01:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Franck (Post 12153819)

Because you are all a bunch of idiots.
sleazy...? :helpme

DamageX 03-27-2007 01:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 12153822)
sleazy...? :helpme
No, his retarded brother. :)

polish_aristocrat 03-27-2007 08:07 AM
one more article about this, confirming that on Friday we can expect a final vote...

ICANN votes this week on .xxx porn domain

Quote:
Faced with an outcry against the creation of a dedicated ".xxx" suffix for pornography Web sites, leaders of ICANN are set to vote on Friday on whether to launch the initiative.

Supporters say adult content would be easier to regulate if it had its own cordoned section of the Web. But critics including religious leaders say the move could make adult content too easy to find, while others complain that increased filtering could harm the sites' right to freedom of speech.

"This clearly is a controversial issue, and an issue that polarises, and that conflict is mirrored on the board," said Paul Twomey, chief executive of ICANN, the Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers.

"We are still actively seeking input on the issue, and the degree of feedback we've received has been vigorous, with the overwhelming amount of public feedback on the negative rather than the positive. I can't tell you what the outcome will be because I don't know," he said.


http://www.computerworlduk.com/manag...fm?newsid=2381

polish_aristocrat 03-28-2007 08:51 AM
new letter from Stuart Lawley to ICANN

http://icann.org/correspondence/lawl...rf-23mar07.pdf


and the decision on .xxx is expected in about 40 hours from now :warning

http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/

as said above, there will be a live coverage of the discussion and voting of the ICANN Board, although there are sometimes some technical difficulties with the webcast

polish_aristocrat 03-29-2007 01:45 AM
the GAC just confirmed its opposition to the current .xxx proposal, and agreed with the concerns made by the Government of Canada few weeks ago, opposing .xxx

:banana

vote on .xxx in 24 hours from now :thumbsup

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE 03-29-2007 08:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 12163843)
the GAC just confirmed its opposition to the current .xxx proposal, and agreed with the concerns made by the Government of Canada few weeks ago, opposing .xxx



vote on .xxx in 24 hours from now :thumbsup

We will come out on top, I have faith :banana

davecummings 03-29-2007 10:00 AM
If anyone stays up to watch the webcast. please post the results here for us to see when we get up in the morning--thanks!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123