2257 Lawyers that did NOT support .XXX TLDs?
 

What's the list of 2257 lawyers that did NOT support .XXX TLDs?

I would like to know this as well.

I assume the ones at the FSC for a brunt of em.

Adult Law

Rob Apgood of Adult Law is an experienced adult industry attorney and very knowledgeable where 2257 is concerned, specifically. He hasn't made a public comment one way or another on .xxx to this point; I'm sure if you drop him a line he'd be happy to give you his take on the issue, though.

- Q.

The only public statement that has been made by 'industry' attorney is Larry Walters; http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-xxx/msg00003.html (supporting .XXX)

His post was during the open forum, where people were able to make their comments and probably helped

I was one of the handful that did post up comments;
http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-xxx/msg00053.html


from larry's post:
"The webmaster community should get behind this proposal which will give something back, instead of waiting for another group to submit a generic TLD proposal based purely on profit motive. "


Stuart Lawley's comment in an AVNonline interview (http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=231312)

"question: Is this solely a for-profit venture?

Clearly, there?s no hiding that. I?m an entrepreneur, and hopefully this is going to be a sound business, running the machinery of the registry under me. But IFFOR makes the policies; ICM doesn?t make the policies. We don?t set the rules. So we cannot change the rules to suit our profit motive. "




excerpt from: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-5176620.html

"Under his proposal, submitted last week to the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), .xxx domain names would be sold for $70
to $75 each. Child pornography would be verboten, but pretty much anything
else would be permissible, Lawley said. "Apart from child pornography, which
is completely illegal, we're really not in the content-monitoring business."

Instead, Lawley and his partners are in the business to make money. A report
from Reuters Business Insight in February 2003 calculated that sex
represented two-thirds of all online content revenue in 2001, and that it
had ballooned to a $2.5 billion industry since then. Lawley estimates that
25 percent of all Internet search queries are related to sex and that over a
million adult domain names exist. Owning the rights to sell pieces of .xxx
real estate, he concluded, would be a perfect way to make money off of
consumers' insatiable appetite for online raunch and ribaldry."




Fight the .XXX!

isn't child porn forbidden on .com already? So what would saying it is on .xxx do?

absolutely..... and ASACP does help law enforcement to track down the bad .COM

.XXX has been pitched to so many that it will protect children, when there is absolutely no plasusible proof that it can, other than marketing spin.

From my work with ASACP, most of the CP is hosted on free webhosts and hosts outside the US.

.XXX wouldn't stop any of that.

Aly will be having tom Hymes from FSC to talk about .XXX

Should be a great show to tune in at 1pm PSt

http://www.ynotradio.com/


Fight the Plug!

Jeffrey Douglas and Reed Lee (FSC attorneys) do not support .XXX (and FSC itself does not support .XXX)

back over a year ago when FsC has their member meeting to discuss it, Jeffrey and Reed ripped throug the .XXX idea.



Fight the shredding!

70 to 75$. that is fucking absurd.

FTP who is spinning now with statements like this?

".XXX has been pitched to so many that it will protect children, when there is absolutely no plasusible proof that it can, other than marketing spin.
From my work with ASACP, most of the CP is hosted on free webhosts and hosts outside the US."

Protect children from accessing is one of the agenda's. Not stopping CP per say but putting in the effort to make adult content less accessable to children.

Along with regulation guidlines for .xxx owners and thus in time create some neccessary regulation this industry needs. No sense in legit companies having to compete against crooked ones within .xxx. Non legit companies will be snuffed out of .xxx in time.


Stop the spinning wheels!

But we will buy them all the day they go on sale because this industry will never learn. The same as idiots will keep processing with Ibill... and do business with known scammers.

It's kind of sad really. For as much as we drive online technology, we are always taking 1 step backwards for every 2 we take forwards.

If you're insinuating ICM registry are scammers then I suggest you post some proof.

Wow, AlienQ just posted what I was about to say

I said nothing about that. I said as simply as I could that people in this industry continue to do business with known scammers. You jumped to conclusions on that one. I guess that's where your heads at right now.

There is alot of jumping to conclusions about .xxx.Alot of spin and misunderstanding and scare tactics by those that oppose it.

Maybe people should sit and reasonably give it an unbiased thought.