ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Cybersafety Document Comment

  • To: cyber-safety-petition@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Cybersafety Document Comment
  • From: Ben Tasker <btasker@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:38:43 +0000

It would appear that once again rights of the individual are being impacted by 
the beliefs of a few. Any that own an Internet connected computer already 
have the means, and the right to block access to Adult Material from their 
system. There is a wealth of software commercially available for this task, 
and a new regulatory body is not required.

I'd also note the Religous motivation behind this suggestion, and would like 
to point out that there was previously talk of a .xxx domain. Although this 
would have made restricting access to Adult Sites far easier, many religous 
groups opposed the idea and it was abandoned.

Rather than setting up a new Regulatory Authority, I would suggest that it is 
far better to point supporters in the direction of software such as 

I also note in other comments references to CP80.org. It seems that the 
intended action of some of these commentators would be to force Adult sites 
to use a non-standard port (i.e. neither 80 or 8080). Quite what benefit this 
would actually have is unclear, most Web browser vendors would probably adapt 
their products to check for listening servers on the new port when attempting 
to access any Uniform Resource Locator.
Furthermore, why the format and structure of the Internet should be modified 
in order to satisfy the will of the few is quite beyond me.

I am more than capable of using the Internet without stumbling onto Adult 
Websites, so I struggle to understand just where this issue has arisen from

B Tasker

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy