Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikesouth
I don't see either of you fucks lining up to put a stop to this shit you say CAN'T happen..Were are you?
And you wonder why most people would rather tell people they have a sister in a whorehouse than a brother who is an attorney.
Porn Valley- The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) is opposed to legislation introduced March 15 by Senators Max Baucus [pictured] (D-Mont) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark) that would ghettoize content-based speech on the Internet by creating a mandatory .xxx top-level domain.
The bill, titled the "Cyber Safety for Kids Act of 2006," requires the Department of Commerce within 30 days after enactment to direct ICANN to approve a top-level "international" domain for "material that is harmful to minors, such as [a] domain name ending in .xxx," and establishes a timeline of 60 days for ICANN to "commence and complete" the application process for the establishment of the new domain.
Within 6 months of the establishment of the TLD, all adult websites are required to register a .xxx address if they contain sexually explicit material that conforms with the definition of "material that is harmful to minors" as defined in the bill, with civil penalties for lack of compliance. The Department of Commerce is also tasked with setting and enforcing the civil penalties.
|
It never ends, does it??
Comment!! Firstly, ICANN remains a contractor for the US Dept of Defense. Why this situation still remains is beyond belief. There are currently moves by other nations to have the equivalent of ICANN set up within a neutral jurisdiction and have full representation from all countries who have TLD's.
The US Dept of Commerce requiring what should in fact be an international org, to produce a XXX TLD along with the accompaying requirements, is simply insane.
Domains operational outside US jurisdiction are not obliged to conform to the laws of the US in the first instance - they abide by the laws of the country in which they operate.
For the reasons you obviously posted Mike, - this is not a proposal which is good for US webmasters. It is also very ill-conceived and leaves doubt about the Senators who introduced this proposed legislation - it is transaparency clear they have little clue about background implications, tho it may have been done with good intentions. It takes more than just good intentions.