Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FightThisPatent
i don't recall reading anywhere the suggestion of fear by "tin foil wearers" that with .XXX means the US can block porn sites.
the argument has always been made that ISP and blocking software/hardware could block via IP and domain. Private sector can do alot more controlling and filtering than the US government.
|
I've read on GFY people believing both the public and private sector will block .XXX, truth is it won't happen. Filtering software is far more effective based on domain, I really don't know many who base on IP, and I'd expect most to simply block .XXX as a whole rather than individual sites.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FightThisPatent
not necessarily.. the 25% number is way out of line, but we do have sin taxes in the US. Look at what used to be the online-tobacco industry doing about 4B a year... got wiped out by visa... pressures from states that were losing revenue due to no ability to tax on an internet order, caused very large and measureable losses of state income.
states like NY and CA (large populations) could see that taxing porn is an easy well to dip into, since they already tax strip clubs, adult video/books, etc. If more people are enjoying online porn over the brick-and-morter porn, then loss of revenue can also be felt by the states.
making the credit card companies collect at point of purchase is an easy way to do it, since companies like ccbill and paycom handle "high risk" accounts (ie. porn), that it would be fairly safe to assume that anyone that processes through these "adult" processors were of adult content.
So the irony here is that government and groups may feel porn is deviant, but yet, they derive revenue from its existance.
|
I agree they could but the payment processors (the point of purchase) will simply move abroad, CCBill already has a very good EU unit and I'd expect Ron Cadwell to be more than capable of finding the best solution for the adult industry.