.xxx is still a bad idea
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ICANN was smart enough to reject .xxx for the 2000 expansions; I hope it's smart enough to reject it this time as well. Let's review everything wrong with this proposal: I note (with some concern) that most of the messages of support seem to originate from people who haven't actually read the proposal; they're non-pornographers who think the .xxx TLD will be used to force adult content out of the other TLDs. The proposal does NOT advocate that; if it did, the proposal would be delusional. Let's review why: First, the .xxx registry does *not* have the power to make the other registries stop allowing adult content. (If registries had the power to retroactively add restrictions to other registries' charters, the entire TLD system would be unstable to the point of uselessness; no domain registrant could ever depend on using a TLD for its original intent.) Does anybody here think that the .com and .biz registries will *voluntarily* give up all the easy porn money? (If they do, they're delusional.) As an non-pornographer, I *have* to object to any policy that would lead to TLDs unilaterally altering other TLDs' charters. I'm not even sure ICANN has the authority to issue a top-down ban on adult content in non-xxx TLDs, but if they did, it would probably result in all registries raising the (wholesale) price of registrations, because the registries couldn't possibly afford to review every web site, mailing list, IRC channel, etc., *without* raising prices significantly. Again, as a non-pornographer, I *have* to object to any policy that would lead to an across-the-Net price increase. Finally, even if the anti-porn crowd routed around ICANN and tried to get government intervention to move all adult content to .xxx, they would have to do so in *every* *country* *on* *Earth*. Otherwise, all you're doing is giving a competitive advantage to pornographers in countries that don't have such laws. Of course, many countries will *never* pass such laws, some of the countries that might pass them have Supreme Courts that would invalidate such laws, and the 200 nations on Earth will never agree on an international definition of "adult content", which makes the whole issue moot. (Afficionados of adult content will just end up patronizing content providers in the least strict countries; at best, Internet anti-porn rules will be an economic boost for countries will weak restrictions, and an economic penalty for countries with strict rules.) (To digress a bit: One of the rationales provided by the .xxx sponsor is that .xxx domains will be "safe" under a U.S. domain-naming law that many lawyers believe unconstitutional. Even if the suspicious law remains on the books, it does nothing to affect non-xxx domains outside the United States. I think the .xxx proposal in disingenuous in citing a bad law.) Now that we've established that .xxx will *not* be the only TLD to contain adult content, we have to think about how useful it is as a non-exclusive TLD. The fact is, .xxx TLDs will be at a competitive disadvantage to non-xxx TLDs *because* they're easier to filter. I just *know* somebody will say "Filtering is to protect children, so it doesn't matter if .xxx is filtered more." Yeah, right. There are already ISPs and entire *countries* trying to block adult content from their networks. .xxx's filterability *will* be used to block content from adults, giving an economic advantage to non-xxx domains. Given the same content on an .xxx and a non-xxx domain, the .xxx domain will have a smaller audience because of compulsory filtering. Does the adult content industry need a TLD guaranteed to make them *less* money that the other TLDs? Probably not. Likewise, people who *don't* want to see adult content will never be able to depend on non-xxx domains being free of adult content, which makes it nigh-useless as a filter. In fact, it may be detrimental to such users, because it encourages them to depend on simplistic filtering rules. So, summarizing: You'll never get all of the adult content out of the non-xxx TLDs, and even if you tried, you'll never get an international definition of adult content, which means you'll just be hurting the economies of the countries that create the strictest restrictions. This can't possibly be a good plan -- it effects are mostly negative, and the positive effects will be distributed unequally. All you really get from the .xxx proposal is a hyper-specialized version of .com, whose rollout will probably resemble the chaos of .biz: A series of fights and lawsuits betweeen companies making defensive registrations and domain-squatters trying to grab "kewl" domain names. (As someone who used to work for a domain registrar, I'm confident that the only people who really benefit from such chaos are the registrars and registries getting paid for the chaos.) The .xxx TLD is still one of the worst TLD proposals around. ICANN should reject it, and reject it loudly, otherwise we'll be having this debate *every* time ICANN solicits proposals for new TLDs. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.01 iD8DBQFAkKMdcpuEJT2bpHsRApsjAJ0YAPr0g30sRnzzcPYpMbsgg7G0KwCfUpcO MkP1tKNkJw65ef19dNAxHok= =6K4H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |