Attorney Says .XXX Needed To Bring Adult Zoning Laws to Internet
 

This from the L.A. Times:

Bret Fausett, an intellectual property lawyer in Los Angeles who sits on some ICANN committees, said the .xxx domain could allow Congress to create laws for the Internet, such as those that prohibit adult stores near schools.

"People who didn't understand the proposal thought it was horrible because it would actually promote the acceptability and spread of pornography," he said. "In fact, it was intended to do just the opposite."

http://www.latimes.com/business/cust...business-enter

one way or another we're going to get fucked.

last sentence of the article:

[jason hendeles]
"The existence of adult material online, it's not something that can be ignored," he said. "Our hope is that by being responsible there will be benefits."


what benefits? i thought the "benefit" was that it saves children from seeing the "bad stuff".

the "responsible" thing would be for ICM to push for .KIDS, charge $120/domain and have IFFOR convince PARENTS to be "responsible" and install a filter to block out stuff, as well as use a web browser that uses a "white list" of domains that is kid-safe.. including those that would have .KIDS extension.


Fight the .GREEDY!

Even if they tried to push it, there would be so many damn lawsuits that it would never go into effect.

It would be a big time censorship case. Doesn't matter if Bush or some democrat pushed it through, it would never hold up in court. They would have a much easier time trying to get a adult labeling rateing system set in place.

Funny how Hendeles keeps stepping back. First, it protects kids. Then, when that's exposed as BS, he says it makes adult sites accepted in mainstream. When the Christian groups don't like that line, he backs up to statements that we can HOPE that there will be benefits. Wow! So, we put our businesses at risk, deal with coutless lawsuits, censorship, blocked traffic, $75 domain registrations, brand protection issues, and god knows what else.... and then cross our fingers and HOPE that something good comes from it? Who does business that way? What a joke.

lawyers say anything they are paid to say and say whatever will get them into the papers or news sites nowadays.

that is true, but let's hope people are still confused and will oppose it, heh

Well, that's true, but who would be paying him to say THAT then? Certainly not ICM, since it goes completely against their "it's voluntary" line. Certainly not any conservative family groups, since he's saying they don't understand how it will hurt porn instead of help porn. No, it sure sounds like a statement that would come from someone involved at ICANN who doesn't want this potentially lucrative deal to get sidelined or eliminated.

The US doesnt own the fucking internet, im fucking sick of this shit

And that's the point that a lot of other governments are trying to make regarding dot-xxx. A lot of countries are unhappy that the US is trying to unilaterally impose .XXX on the entire internet community. It's especially problematic for human rights in oppressive countries.

Ahhh, the true colors of the dot-xxx people keep coming out now that they're worried about appeasing right-wing groups.

From a newsfactor.com story:

"A nonprofit board that will oversee the domain is being put together, Aftab said, and there are indications that a child safety advocate will be asked to join. In many ways, the creation of a virtual red light district will act like its real-life component, he added. It will separate adult-themed material into its own section that can be policed accordingly."

Policed accordingly? Hmmm, whatever could they mean by that?

Aftab, for those of you who don't know him, will almost certainly be one of the people who will sit on the IFFOR Board making decisions about OUR businesses. Additionally, Aftab's organization is expected to get money from each domain name registration... in other words, if you buy a .xxx domain name, part of your money will go to people like Aftab who want to make sure your business is "policed accordingly." Wow, what a great deal for the industry! :throwup

is anyone in this industry doing anything to actually oppose .xxx or are we just hoping that the misinformed groups like Family Research Council will oppose it succesfully forever just like they did before?

( the 6k letters sent to ICANN and the Department of Commerce mentioned in the media, were probably mostly the automatic letters from their site, posted by baddog few weeks ago here and signed with non adult email adresses by a few GFYers too lol )

Umm...

Yeah we do...

Well a few of the big fish who have about 2 ft of foresight support it because short term gain and most just talk here but dont take any action. Its very sad and this gets thru and happens we are all going to be very fucked including those who supported it because the policing group will be made up of very few adult industry people.

:BangBang: jason hendeles :321GFY

By bringing zoning laws to the internet, does that mean my websites can not be within so many clicks of a church or school?

at first I thought this was a good thing when Jason told me that he was getting .xxx but now that I've read all this I don't agree so much anymore. I guess I'll have to chat with him about it tonight at dinner. :Oh crap

mmk .... i don't like the idea of a .xxx TLD

Never lose sight of the fact that the ONLY benefit Hendales, Lawly and ICMR see in this is OUR fucking money

Fuck those assholes

can we get an amen!?


fully agree with you on this, and what about just mandating ICRA labeling, it's already out there and a lot of responsible site owners ALREADY use it


:thumbsup

:pimp

ya know heres what I dont get

WE dont want this travesty
THEY don't want this travesty

why doesn't ICANN wake the fuck up and nip this shit in the bud and pull it, sending ICMR to go find someone else to scam.

I agree with Mikesouth,

I think that ICM is only after making their pocketbooks fatter.

Speaking of zoning ... webhosting companies could be effected ... ok, these examples are far-fetched, but with politicians, one never knows LOL!

* Being forbidden from hosting .XXX domains on the same IP as non-adult sites.

* Being required to host .XXX sites in a separate IP range surrounded by empty "buffer" IPs.

* Being forbidden using a .XXX domain name that exactly corresponds to an active .COM, .NET, .ORG domain belonging to someone else.

* .XXX registry being required maintain access lists, and to pass those lists along to ISPs, of all .XXX domains and what locations each one may be accessed from/blocked from.

* Require approval by the local zoning board for registrants that reside in the U.S. in communities with formal zoning laws.

* .XXX registration would not be instant - but instead require extensive background check to be sure one has paid child support, is not a child preditator, not a felon, etc.

* .XXX Registry be required to inspect every .XXX site for compliance on a continual basis.

Sure one can come up with more ... .XXX opens a can of worms much bigger than most initially realized - glad to see more and more folks, especially politicians, coming to their senses...

.XXX is a bad idea, period!

Ron

exactly, because when someone does a reverse lookup on the domain, to resolve to the IP, they would want to block that IP.. since most likely the .COM equivalent of the .XXX would be on the same IP (vhost).

IP blocking was a failed way of filtering as netnanny and cybersitter tried, but having the above rule put in place, would make IP blocking more effective.



Fight the Voluntary Regulations by IFFOR!

I could be wrong, but isn't Aftab a woman??

http://www.msnbc.com/news/466460.asp?cp1=1

Connor if you are going to be reporting the news and taking a proactive stance- then at least know who you are talking about-
I am not dissing you, but I sat in on her meetings in 2000 and know who she is-

Misinformation is what is killing this industry, don't feed into the hysteria-
I like that you are passionate about this subject- but there is a lot you do not know...

I am sick as well of it :mad:

actually, lack of public release of information is what is killing the industry.

Being a mover and shaker that you are, you were probably privy to many early .XXX type discussions, in knowing who was/is doing the "selling out".

Alot of other people know the inside scoop as well, and this information will hardly see the light of day publically, since many do business with the players that provided some influential support for .XXX (the big 10 want to stay the big 10 and everyone else can be affiliates), and would rather keep quiet to keep up their biz relationships, then to step up to expose those that are contributors to the problem.

It's understandable... it's business, but it is these kinds of secrets and backroom deals that lead to the killing of the industry. it's hard as it is for groups like FSC to get people to circle the wagons to protect from outside attacks, and then to have insiders come in and assist in the small dismantling of the industry when co-operating with the likes of ICM/IFFOR.

There were ALOT of questionable marketing things going on in the "party like it was 1999" days, and those tactics created new laws and lots more heat on businesses today that have still survived and new ones coming in, who are running their businesses responsibly and as a business, rather than as a personal checking account.

So if there is misinformation, please help to correct it. Alot of the 'misinformation' probably stems from lack of information, and therefore relying on extrapolation or hearsay to piece things together.


Fight the Soapbox!

how was the dinner? :winkwink: