more on Editors comment on the number of items re ex-ex-ex

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Bob Frankston <Bob2-19-0501 () bobf frankston com>
Date: June 3, 2005 12:37:46 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net, 'Ip ip' <ip () v2 listbox com>
Cc: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>, 'Lauren Weinstein'  
<lauren () vortex com>
Subject: RE: [IP] Editors comment on the number of items re ex-ex-ex


I sent an earlier sarcastic response but realize that people want  
their XXX
be it in the name of a movie, liquor or prurience. I may see the idea as
silly but it is serious.

This is deeper than the US first amendment -- it is a fundamental  
attack on
the Internet's End-to-End principle and exacerbates the flaw in the DNS
which puts meaning into the deepest levels of the Internet rather than
defining it at the edge.

That's why a simple typo can get you to the wrong site -- trademark  
rules
address such confusion but the DNS does not and cannot. If the DNS  
didn't
have any semantics then we would use other mechanisms that could take  
into
account social and human realities in translating intent into a handle.

At this point I realize it's too little and too late and that the P2P
community is right in creating their own solutions at the edge.

The XXX is an inevitable result of providing entrée for governance and
social policies and you're fighting against people's perception that  
meaning
is intrinsic. It's no different than the FCC sparing us fuck and thus
creating a whole industry of faux outtakes -- as much as I deride them
Tellywood is very adaptive and now creates scenes whose only purpose  
is to
be censored so as to create a market for the "real" unrated version.

Once you have created an artificial scarcity you can then charge for  
it --
be it diamonds, communications channels or valuable words. You even have
multiple companies selling names for stars (astronomical -- but the  
word is
probably more associated with Tellywood). XXX is just a commodity  
that can
be sold at a high price. Yes, it will do damage and like 900 numbers and
X-rated movies it will have unintended consequences.

The problem, however, is not with XXX, but is inherent in the flaws  
in the
Internet make the IP address function as a name and a path. It creates a
need for stable handles and their management and thus the opportunity  
for
ICANN to compound the error of using semantic-laden handles for TLDs and
SLDS. XXX is an inevitable and unavoidable result.

Given XXX you might as well entertain yourself thinking about  
scenarios such
as French vs Alabama laws as applied to XXX. Depressing, of course  
but wry
amusement may have to be the salvage value.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ip () v2 listbox com [mailto:owner-ip () v2 listbox com] On  
Behalf Of
David Farber
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 10:21
To: Ip ip
Subject: [IP] Editors comment on the number of items re ex-ex-ex

I believe this is a very important issue in both network "governance"
and maybe in (in the USA) the 1 st. amendment.  I am concerned about
the morfing of the xxx into a place where birth control , drug
discussions,  will be required to live in.

I am trying to conver all sides.

Dave

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as BobIP () Bobf Frankston com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
people/



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/