Quote:
Originally Posted by spazlabz
yeah... unfortunately I believe this TLD is gonna happen and it blows big time. I just hope that the creation of this BS does not inspire the US Congress to legislate it's use. The harm to our industry could be HUGE if they do
|
Rest assured, if ICANN approves the TLD, someone in Congress
will introduce such a bill, and if that bill ever makes it out of committee, it will very likely be voted into law. For that matter, such bills have been proposed before, without a .XXX TLD in existence, so it stands to reason that they'd give it another go once the TLD is actually available for use.
Of course, passing a law like that is merely step one, and it is less than certain that Congress can craft a law along those lines that will survive court scrutiny. Stuart Lawley has averred to challenge any such law in court (for what a promise from him is worth), and there's a very strong First Amendment argument to be made that forcing adult sites to move to .XXX would be unconstitutional.
Assuming it passes, I think one of the most interesting questions about the new TLD and its governing body (IFFOR) is this: will they permit the operation of user-generated/uploaded content sites? If so, how can they assure people that such .XXX sites will be "safer" or more "responsible" than their .com equivalents? A user can upload any sort of material he/she wants to a site that allows uploads, obviously, including file-based exploits, CP, copyrighted material, defamatory and/or libelous statements, etc. The safety and responsibility promises have hitherto been a mainstay of Lawley's argument about why .XXX will be beneficial to both the industry and to the world at large, so this is not an insubstantial question.
One possibility is that Lawley knows that keeping those promises is unfeasible from a practical standpoint, and he is knowingly selling snake oil in order to get .XXX approved. The other possibility is that he is an ignorant buffoon where the finer points of digital data distribution are concerned, and he really believes that IFFOR can effectively patrol and control content on the new TLD.
IMO, neither of these possibilities does much to inspire confidence in ICM, or confidence in the prospect of ICM operating a porn-specific TLD.