ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Re: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Call for ICANN to Kill "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Top-Level Domain at Tomorrow's Vote

  • To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Call for ICANN to Kill "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Top-Level Domain at Tomorrow's Vote
  • From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:33:03 -0800

Lauren and all,

  I agree as do many of our members for many of the same reasons
you state.  However there is no good technical reason for not
allowing .XXX, even though I and many others see it as a
trap on privacy, ergo a slippery slope in and of itself.

  The real problem ICANN is having is that .com and .org
already have so many porn related registrations [ Domain
names ] they are seemingly not willing to police their own
registries accordingly.  Of course ICANN will adamantly
deny this or ignore same, ergo defacto denial.

privacy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>    Call for ICANN to Kill "Dot-Ex-Ex-Ex" Top-Level Domain at Tomorrow's Vote
>                http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000220.html
> Greetings.  As is already widely known, I remain very strongly
> opposed to the creation of a dot-ex-ex-ex TLD (top-level domain),
> and would find it necessary to continue such opposition through
> whatever venues are available if the domain is approved at a likely
> ICANN vote tomorrow.  I feel that dot-ex-ex-ex would create a
> disastrous slippery slope for censorship and free speech, despite
> its ostensibly "voluntary" nature.  I don't think this is an area
> where ICANN should wish to tread even peripherally.  Like many
> observers, I fail to see what constituency would be positively
> served by dot-ex-ex-ex, other than ICM -- the company that would run
> the TLD and profit from its use.
> The relatively heavy speculative "pre-registrations" on the domain are
> obviously mainly driven by protective actions from existing dot-com
> domain holders, who cannot afford to have the dot-ex-ex-ex versions
> of their domain names obtained by someone else.  This hardly
> qualifies as "support" for the dot-ex-ex-ex concept.
> I hope that ICANN will choose to kill this idea once and for all.  I
> fear that if it is approved, it will only represent the start of a
> long legal path as various governmental and private parties attempt
> to block it, and that would be an unfortunate waste of time and
> resources for everyone.
> --Lauren--
> _______________________________________________
> privacy mailing list
> http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy


Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy