ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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


  • To: "icm-options-report@xxxxxxxxx" <icm-options-report@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: comment
  • From: Marc Salvatierra <marc.salvatierra@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 11:58:05 -0700

The comment below was submitted to ICANN staff outside of the public comment 
forum. For transparency and completeness, staff is submitting the comment into 
the related forum. Other than the commenter's name, all other contact 
information has been redacted from the comment.

From: Wesley Kells
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 11:30 AM
To: John Jeffrey
Subject: More information on Report of Possible Process Options for Further
Consideration of the ICM Application for the .XXX sTLD public comment period

Mr. Jeffrey,

After reviewing some of the posts on the comments section of the .XXX
TLD dilemma, (and being unable to add comments of my own) I noticed a
few things:

1)  Many of the entries are carbon copies of one another.  Meaning that
a grass-roots system is in place, rallying support .. Or, they are
simply spam designed to artificially inflate the statistics against.

2)  Most of the "No's" revolve around protecting some false sense of
eden-like innocence, or emphasize the legality of the previous
rejection.  My comment is, ostensibly, from a security perspective.  We
can't prevent people from doing themselves harm with mundane
categorization tools.  A .XXX domain will not affect the amount of
material available, simply make it identifiable for those wishing to
avoid it.  (much like road/traffic signs)  As an adult, I think it is
irresponsible to blame any personal failings through misuse (failled
marriages etc.), on the sheer existence of such content.  We aren't here
to prevent people from stabbnig themselves with a screwdriver (something
it was not designed for), but cannot through a false sense of
superiority, legislate against such a thing, for that is beyond the
scope of this proposal.

3)  A .XXX domain will enable network managers to create much larger,
default blacklists, preventing access to illicit pages from square one.
Now, does the existence of a .XXX domain, imply that existing pages are
required to migrate to the new TLD addresses?  Or will they be allowed
to co-exist?  If the latter, then sites may avoid blacklisting by
choosing non-.XXX TLDs.  In which case, this argument is only beneficial
for sites in compliance, and ultimately, provides little blacklisting
capabilities beyond traditional methods.  Still, it's something.  Easy
to implement, and provides a safe base to start from.

I would like to see the .XXX TLD become a reality, and there is no
reason aside from misdirected, prohibitive thinking, to prevent it's
creation.  I'm actually surprised this level of effort is required for
such a thing.  Although since ICANN untilmately benefits financially
from the sale of new TLD names, I understand the need for a regulatory


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy