if anything like this did ever pass - everyone in the US would move thier hosting offshore and it wouldnt matter anyways

so when will we know if its decided?

how long does it take to either make it a law or decline it for good?

What makes you think that the owner of girlsex.com or girlsex.net or whatever are going to get *any* preference when it comes to allocating girlsex.xxx? No, if any sort of mandatory .xxx ever goes live, you'll be left to fight it out with every big-money domain speculator on the globe for the .xxx versions of your current domains. Trademark law may give you some preference in certain cases, but I wouldn't count on that too much. \

It will be bloody and messy and the shit will be falling out for *decades*.

All democrat sponsored bills hmmmmmmmmmmm :1orglaugh

do you NOT read posts? geesh! I post AGAIN for those that need hooked on phonics. Notice which STATES they are from and who those states voted for. Montana has only voted for a democrat Presidential candidate TWICE since 1952. That's 14 elections. In 1964 and in 1992.

Notice they are from MONTANA and ARKANSAS

2000 election

Arkansas
Bush 472,120 51%
Gore 420,424 45%

Montana
Bush 239,755 58%
Gore 137,264 34%

2004 election

Arkansas
Bush 572,898 54%
Kerry 469,953 45%


Montana
Bush 266,063 59%
Kerry 173,710 39%

Your logic is a joke dude. The senators sponsoring the bill are DEMOCRATS!! It doesnt matter if every single person in the state besides them are republicans. They are DEMOCRATS! Duh fuckin duh.

Thanks for the stats that show Gore and Kerry both getting spanked by a Diabolicaly brillian moron though. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Oh but they CAN'T d that...just ask Greg Picconelli or Lawrence Walters ...ASSWIPES

They wanted to sell us all out to .XXX rremember.

I HATE Always being right.

My logic is fine. No such thing as a democrat in a republican state. fact is Montana has participated in 29 presidnetial elections and voted republican 18 times. Including 12 of the last 14. At least I looked up FACTS and not spout off at the mouth.

You are a moron. Porn webmasters for Bush. Jews for Hitler. Blacks for the KKK. Christians for Satan.

Did you look up what party the Governor of Montana belongs to?

Do you know what recent President was FROM FUCKIN ARKANSAS? And won the state? What a dumbass you are srsly. lol

Exactly, so if they want to do it they actually can, can't wait for China to break away with their new domains, if they can pull that everybody else will start doing it. I'm more that willing to give credit to the US for starting the whole Internet thingy, but having Bush controling it makes me uneasy.

I'd never feel sorry for someone who has $14 million to pay for 6 letters and a dot.

That's $2 million per letter and $2 million for the dot.

as usually people arguing about politics and Bush states...

how about someone more familiar with the legislation process answers how long will it take till we know if this bill passes?

and do you actually see it being introduced, and getting the support from both Democrats and Republicans?

some of the religious groups and organisations like Family Research Council were recently strongly against the .xxx idea, but they argued that they are against, because its voluntary. Now since this one is mandatory, they could be probably supporting it...

.

Yup, amazing

If they want ot use filters Just make a mandatory rating system embedded in mata tags on sites and have stiff penalties if you dont ahve the meta tags in yoru site then any fitlering software could easily block said sites.

Here is a little background for you

http://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=m...cle &sid=9663

And that has to do with what MORON? I am not a democrat you dipshit. Arkansas you can legally marry your mother. So that state is fucked up. which I believe that is my point.

You are a piece of shit asshole and a complete idiot. I'm tired are arguing with your retarded ass. Go suck more Bush cock while you are working at Burger King or in jail retard. When are you going to learn he does NOT have your best interest at heart. Do you think he is FOR porn on the internet? Um.. no. Do you he would instantly ban porn of all kinds if he had the power too. Think about that. Of course he would.

I don't have any more time to waste on you. You should do the world a favor and blow your brains out. Hopefully you haven't spawned and little turds like yourself. If you did please have them neutered before you blow your brains out to spare future generations any more of your recessive genes. You are on IGNORE so don't bother replying to my posts. Of course unless you like talking to yourself which I think you do.

Supposedly to be used for sites harmful to minors....?

Hell.. It'll let em know just where to go to get it..

Won't ever work even if implemented..

Teenagers are more computer savvy than their parents, they won't have any problem getting around the .XXX filters.

The .xxx proposal was floated around last year and it didn't fly, hopefully this is also just a trial balloon.

"The .xxx proposal was floated around last year and it didn't fly, hopefully this is also just a trial balloon."

What you mean it didnt fly...its flying its flying

:(

Heard about this on NPR today.

Personally, I think its an OK idea. I dont like the free speech implications but I do like the idea of porn having its own exclusive area on the web.

I also like the idea that I'll be able to snatch up a shitload of .xxx domains in an uncrowded namespace. Being an 80s child, the .com revoultion was almost over with by the time I was born. I'd still like to sell a domain for six figures. hehe

A) If you think you are going to get any of the good .XXX names you are sorely mistaken. There will be a select few that will get their hands on them and you will not be one of them.

B) do you realize that if there is a .XXX and its mandatory all the government has to to is require ISPs to BLOCK all .XXX domains. Or perhaps the ISPs in certain conservative states will do that on their own. How much money are you making then?

This is another one of those "order paper" bills that disappears at the end of the session. That it is only coming out in March means that it is EXTREMELY unlikely to even get a decent reading, as congress will close for the season soon enough so that the mid term people can go off and try to get re-elected.

This is the sort of thing that these two dillweed politicians can use in their campaign ads in the future - "brought forward legislation to protect children from harm on the internet" or some shit like that. It is VERY important for democrats in conservative areas to have this sort of thing in their pockets to show that they are "trying hard" to the church going bible thumpers.

It should also be noted that literally hundreds of pieces of legislation get "introduced" each year and then promptly die on the order paper because there is little or no real support or desire to move such an act forward. At this point, I was unable to the S number for this document, and unable to find anything like it in the congressional register, so it is likely just a trial balloon deal.

It would also be something that would be directly subject to first amendment challenges, as it would limit permitted free speech, and would allow third parties (such as ISPs or other common carriers) to block .XXX material because they do not agree with it, moving the internet porn business into a ghetto that could easily be blocked and sealed off.

Imagine for a minute that say there is a christian backbone provider, owned by, I dunno, a company out of salt Lake City or Mississippi or something, and they decide that they will not carry traffic for any IP that resolves to a .XXX domain. Perhaps they will not carry traffic to any network that has .XXX domains on it.

Suddenly, huge parts of the internet are effectively blackholed.

Christian groups would likely form the "Good parents IP block list" and distribute it free of charge to any ISP or backbone provider that was interested.

Free speech suddenly gets limited.

Not good.

Alex

For those who are curious, you can look at the (are you ready) 160 items introduced or posted for 03/15/06 here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...D010+20060316))

That is right... 160 items in a single day...

Snowball in hell time.

Alex

Sheesh... there are some retards around who can't see further than the end of their noises.

Apart from naive webmasters - they extend up to the govt they elected. No wonder the US is getting deeper in the mire daily - it's sad shit all round.

Purporting to be protecting children and only having one braincell makes even that difficult.

PS... Can someone remind the instigating Senators of this proposed legislation and the US Dept of Commerce that they have no jurisdiction over domains not hosted in US territory? Also that ICANN remains a US DOD subcontractor and this situation does not satisfy other countries in the handling of their TLD's and they are moving towards an international version of ICANN in a neutral jurisdiction and full representation of all participating countries.

They should create .kids if this was trully about protecting kids, but its not forcing everyone to buy the domains. Plus I bet they won't be 15 bucks

Wont go through

i dont care about the fuss being created by some lamers from the US... i dont live there so fuck em.

btw: u can give all your dot coms to me :thumbsup

you know why this democrat shit never ends?

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. by Albert Einstein."

http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/1349

how much money did lawley and hendeles pony up to these guys to set this bill through?

Are you really THAT stupid?

That's a stupid bill, it won't float.

it will be interesting to see what happens also if you think I will just move my server offshore and im fine. If you live in the usa and the money comes back into the usa you have to follow the rules.

also I thought about it ,it becomes law whats to stop it costing $500 a domain? I wouldnt panic this is a election year so there is going to be alot of showboating.

Who operates in the US now? You are crazy if you do! LOL

Hmm bannable offense?



Btw dumb ass. I have a 5 bedroom 2.5 bath brand new house k thx bye. Married with two beautiful daughters.

Your logic is so weak its pathetic. You tout out all these numbers saying it doesnt matter that the two senators are democrats because they come from a red state. We show you that the Gov of Montana is a Democrat, and Bill fucking Clinton was the Gov of Arkansas, and then the President of our country and won the state both times. Dude give up. I see you put me on ignore too. Its always the weak minded that must use that ignore button when they get their asses whipped. lol :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

How is it stupid to point out the fact that Dems are pushing the bill, when everyone runs around on this board blaming republicans for going after the porn market. The plain fact is that the Republicans realize how much of a driving force Porn is in our economy and wont do anything to try and stop it. Please link me to all the republicans that have tried and passed legislation to ban porn. Otherwise stop blaming it on the republicans and stfu.

Btw wasnt it Clinton that pushed for all the age verification crap?

Right wing have created a theme , you know this. Now they are trying to out right wing each other. The only time porn gets attacked is during Republican admin like it or not its the truth.

Again Clinton signed in the age verification crap.