nanog mailing list archives

Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain


From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi () mail r-bonomi com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 12:57:36 -0500 (CDT)


From owner-nanog () merit edu  Thu May 11 12:41:20 2006
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 13:40:22 -0400
From: Alain Hebert <ahebert () pubnix net>
To: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 08:46:40 -0400
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
To: ip () v2 listbox com
Subject: [IP] ICANN rejects .xxx domain

Begin forwarded message:

As reported in:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/print?id=1947950

ICANN has reversed their earlier preliminary approval, and has now
rejected the "dot-xxx" adult materials top-level domain.  I applaud
this wise decision by ICANN, which should simultaneously please both
anti-porn and free speech proponents, where opposition to the TLD
has been intense, though for totally disparate reasons.

Nick's AP piece referenced above notes that there are still
Congressional efforts to mandate such a TLD.  It is important
to work toward ensuring that these do not gain traction.

    Why?

    If we can coral them in it and legislate to have no porn anywhere 
else than on .xxx ... should fix the issue for the prudes out there.

And _that_ is *precisely* "why not".  <grin>

When you figure out _how_ to accomplish the 'and' part of your statement,
*world-wide*, and _how_long_ it would take to do so, *AND*CAN*GET*UNIVERSAL*
*AGREEMENT* about what has to be inside the coral(sic), well, then, and -only-
then can one consider 'what _useful_ purpose' such a TLD would serve.

Note also: attempting to impose additional restrictions on _existant_,
registered domains would likely constitute breach of contract.  With
big liabilities attached --  look at what the hijacking of 'sex.com' ended
up costing the registrar that let it happen.

Restricting future domain registrations _in_an_exsiting_TLD_ raises a 
separate can of worms, regarding existing registry operator and registrar 
contracts.




Current thread: