.KIDS is a better way to protect children
In my previous post titled: "Reasons why .XXX TLD is a good idea", I made satirical commentary that actually expressed why .XXX is a bad idea. All joking aside, the .XXX TLD has been positioned and propositioned by ICM as "protecting children", but yet there is not tangible method or explanation of how that would actually occur. Blocking the .XXX IP in order to block the .COM IP is a swiss cheese solution, filled with so many holes. A web browser could block if it sees .XXX, or an ISP could do the same, but unless .XXX is mandatory world-wide, the "protections" are non-existant. Black List filtering methods are largely ineffective. The common methods to filter by filtering software today, is to create a list of known bad websites, and if the web browser is going to visit a domain on the list, then it is blocked. Black Lists are ineffective because they can only block for the KNOWN domain names. New domains that surface won't be blocked. Black Lists have to be highly maintained and is always a constant battle to keep up. White List filtering is 100% effective, because it works the opposite of Black List filtering. If a website/domain is on the list, it is allowed in. If it is not, it is blocked. Only websites that have been approved to be on a White List are accessible. .KIDS would be an international White List. IFFOR has defined many policies for .XXX that are perfectly suited for .KIDS IFFOR could ensure that only kid-friendly websites are approved for .KIDS This would mean that there would be disney.kids, aol.kids, etc. Any website that wanted to cater towards kids, would find the economic and marketing reasons to purchase a .KIDS domain. US CAN-SPAM laws can be amended to include penalities for emailing to a .KIDS address (ie. little_joey@xxxxxxxx) without proper opt-in by the parent (there are state laws being proposed and passed such as with Utah and Michigan that are attempting to protect children from email solicitations). The major defense against a .KIDS TLD by ICM, is that there is no money to be made from it. Besides that being a telling answer that .XXX isn't really about protecting children, there is an alternate solution. While .XXX is looking to charge $75/domain, it is not without reason that a .KIDS domain could cost like $125/domain per year. yes, it's a high number, but there are logistical costs of validating and ensuring that the .KIDS applicant is a good one. Also, there wouldn't be millions of .KIDS domains, but a sufficient quantity to cover the costs of operations. If ICM feels that the expense to running .KIDS is too great, that there is more profit in .XXX, then the answer is simple. Allow Network Solutions to administer and maintain the .KIDS TLD Network Solutions already has the infrastructure in place, that the .KIDS TLD should not impact it. The IFFOR component of ICM's proposal could still be applied, having child protection experts be on the board, maintaing the integrity of the .KIDS TLD, etc. where IFFOR can service Network Solutions. Another solution, though more drastic, is that if ICANN is failing to serve the needs of ALL internet communities, and choosing to IMPOSE .XXX on the adult online entertainment community that DOESN'T WANT IT, then it seems clear that ICANN has lost touch with reality and with the international members, that maybe the ICANN duties should just be rolled in under the United Nations. -brandon |