Via the BBC: Net porn plan labelled ‘obscene’
The creation of the .xxx net domain has come under fire from net veterans.The decision was called “obscene” by Karl Auerbach, former board member of Icann which approved the .xxx plan.
Mr Auerbach said Icann should be giving priority to socially positive domain name proposals rather than helping pornographers profit.
The decision was also called “dangerous” by net privacy campaigner Lauren Weinstein, who said it could provoke censorship problems for years.
Quite honestly, I think that the net (no pun intended) effect of the .XXX domain will be negligible at best. Those who think that giving porn sites a unique domain will contain pornography on the internet don’t understand how the internet works. It isn’s as iff all “adult” content will migrate to .XXX and then can be easily blocked. It won’t work that way.
As such, Auerbach has a point:
In his blog he asked: “Why should .xxx get precedence over schools, churches, civic groups, aboriginal communities, labour organisations, and artistic groups?”Mr Auerbach said Icann already had many proposals for new domains from many groups that could actually contribute to the value of the internet.
He pointed out that more than 50 organisations have submitted proposals to Icann for new net domains but, so far, only seven of those have actually been created.
June 3rd, 2024 at 11:33 am
While I can understand SOME of the issues people have with the idea of a .xxx TLD, I don’t see the problem with it. It’s a good way to classify the pr0n into a nice, tidy area of the net. Rather like the “Red Light District,” people who want porn will go there, people who don’t want porn will avoid it. This doesn’t mean that pr0n won’t exist outside the RLD TLD (sic), it just means that it will be clearly identified.
But that’s just my take on the matter. I do support sex education in schools, so according to the people I go to church with my opinion doesn’t seem to matter. Meh.
June 3rd, 2024 at 11:52 am
In theory, the segregation of porn sites would be a good thing. My point is that such a segregation is essentialy impossible.
June 3rd, 2024 at 5:47 pm
This is one of the ideas that was floated by Justice O’Connor in one of the internet pr0n cases (Reno v. ACLU or Ashcroft v. ACLU).
While it’s likely to be mostly unenforceable, it’s also likely to be something that people adopt to at least be seen as doing something.
June 4th, 2024 at 3:40 pm
In a perfect world, the .xxx plan would work. But than again, in a perfect world, there would be no porn anyway. I still don’t how porn isn’t considered a form of prostitution. Yes, I know it’s big business. But so is the drug trade, and that’s illegal. Why should it be legal to pay a girl to have sex on film when it’s illegal to pay a girl to have sex otherwise. As for me, I like Google’s safe search alot. That’s what I use, and I’ve never had to feal with internet smut!