Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ICANN Likely Finally To Approve .xxx For Porn Sites

Posted by timothy on from the type-one-and-type-two-errors dept.

shmG writes with this from the International Business Times: "The company that oversees Web addresses is expected to give the go-ahead on Friday for the creation of a .xxx suffix for websites with pornographic content, company officials indicated on Thursday. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which oversees the Internet on behalf of the US government, has in the past resisted creating a .xxx generic domain name system akin to those for .com and .net."

33 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. I've got dibs by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Funny

    on fu.xxx

    1. Re:I've got dibs by psychicsword · · Score: 5, Funny

      Too bad you will never get any

  2. because .xxx is nothing like .sex by oneiros27 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Doesn't anyone bother to read the RFCs? (probably not, they're too interested in trying to sell domains to make money)

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, the .xxx domain is probably pointless. The vast majority of adult sites aren't going to be moving so you still won't be able to easily filter based on that criteria. The doc you linked does mention a different idea that I could get behind though, establish a .kids which would be a semi-walled garden of child appropriate material. That allows the creating of a relatively safe space for children which would be relatively enforceable by knowledgeable parents without creating the privacy and legal concerns that everyone seems to have with a .xxx domain.

    2. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by audubon · · Score: 3, Informative

      The doc you linked does mention a different idea that I could get behind though, establish a .kids which would be a semi-walled garden of child appropriate material.

      That's been tried, via an administered second-level domain, .kids.us

      From the link, It's the first and only "youth-friendly" Web space to be established by the United States government, and it features advanced technical, policy and operational mechanisms that keep young people informed, entertained and protected online.

    3. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by yeshuawatso · · Score: 3, Informative

      If anyone is too lazy to Google U-Rated, it's the UK equivalent of US Rated G. For a second, I was asking myself "What the hell is a U rating?" Google is your friend.

    4. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by deinol · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's a big difference between trying to force all porn sites to use .xxx (or any other specific term) and allowing people who wish to buy .xxx domains to do so.

      In other news, who cares?

      --
      Got Apathy?
    5. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, the .xxx domain is probably pointless. The vast majority of adult sites aren't going to be moving so you still won't be able to easily filter based on that criteria.

      The .xxx domain definitely has a point. If porn sites don't move, you won't be able to filter them by domain. So, they will be forced to move by law, you know, for the children. That gives the government a legal cudgel it can use against anyone who hosts borderline material. This causes a chilling effect on healthy discussions of sexuality, advancing the agenda of the puritanical community.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by moderatorrater · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For a while new porn sites will be registered at both .com and .xxx, and the existing sites will still probably be primarily .com (although they'll register .xxx for brand purity). As a filter it will be meaningless, and as a tool for censorship it won't work. Legitimate porn sites tend to not try to get around filtering right now anyway, so the free speech concerns seem overblown.

      However, it does offer value to both porn sites and internet users. First, it's a namespace that you always know is porn, so if you're looking for porn this can be a useful tool. Filtering these sites is as easy as it can get, and as mentioned before most porn sites don't try to get around filters anyway. Porn sites now have a way of identifying themselves more fully for customers and they don't have to compete for .com names.

      Most importantly in my mind, this could be the easiest way to get people weaned off of .com as the only tld. .gov is useful for a small subset of sites, .org can be useful for some sites (although they almost all try to get the .com as well), and .co.uk is the .com of Britain. If they introduce .xxx and it takes off, it'll be a big step forward in making more domain names viable, and I consider that to absolutely be a good thing.

    7. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What did children do to be locked up in a prison of mind? Or rather, do you want to teach them that they should expect such?

      Because, sorry, porn does not even interest kids before puberty (really, they simply don't care - no threat of lifelong damage or anything, its just that). And after puberty I think you should kind of have to realize it is a human urge that cannot be suppressed entirely without negative effects. Even more iportantly that at the time of puberty they are definitely getting some of the last opportunities on the path to maturity of mind.
      If you prevent them from learning about what's REALLY out there in the world (wikipedia, news, violence, porn and prostitution, inequality and unfairness...) and even to feel hurt by it, they may never in their life manage to deal with it.

    8. Re:because .xxx is nothing like .sex by FlyMysticalDJ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, I would think a fair number of adult sites would WANT to move to .xxx.
      I mean, obviously it will be banned at work, schools, libraries, so there will still be sites on .com for the people that are trying to grab that demographic, but if the majority of porn users are actually adults in their own homes LOOKING for porn, the .xxx domain would make it very easy to know where the porn is. And as a result the porn sites will move there to get more exposure to their best customers: people who want, can pay for, are legally allowed to consume, and are currently in a place where they can browse porn.

      That said, I am still against the gov't trying to regulate what is and isn't porn and requiring sites to move.

  3. Obvious... by brian0918 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ICANN HAZ PORN?

  4. Open the floodgates.... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With the new rules letting any company/group create a TLD if they've got the money and infrastructure, it's only a matter of time before we'll be going to Sprite.coca-cola and BigMac.McD.... so why not give the sex operators a red light district that's easily blockable. Sure, it won't block 100% of porn, but it's one rule that can block 100% porn with no false positives.

    1. Re:Open the floodgates.... by compro01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but it's one rule that can block 100% porn with no false positives.

      Only if you make the assumption that your definition of porn matches their definition of porn.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  5. XXX domain as a tool for censorship by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope this doesn't encourage would-be censors to restrict the kinds of content allowed in non-xxx domains. Not all content fits neatly into an XXX designation, and even if it did it is simply not right to restrict XXX content to XXX domains. Having an XXX domain has always struck me as either pointless (insofar as XXX content might continue to be hosted on non-XXX domains) or otherwise a really bad idea (insofar as no XXX content may be allowed outside of XXX domains).

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:XXX domain as a tool for censorship by gman003 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most likely, nothing. They'll probably just register the domain and leave it empty, or make it redirect to a .com. I just tried mcdonalds.tk, it loaded a blank page. By extension, they'll do the same to .xxx. So that will get blocked by a blanket ban, but it won't really affect anything. How often do you go to slashdot.com?

      I don't foresee many false positives. Besides a few puns like ro.xxx, I think anything in .xxx will be porn.

  6. FINALLY by decipher_saint · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally there will be porn on the internet.

    Took them long enough!

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  7. Re:So... by snowraver1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If google.xxx is what I think it would be, it could perhaps be the best website on the Internet.

    --
    Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
  8. It's all irrelevant by PhrstBrn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody will use it. Using .xxx will allow every administrator to just wildcard block the .xxx domain, and I doubt its in the adult industry's best interest to use it.

    It's almost baffling that the "oh, think of the children" crowd doesn't want this. I would think it would be of their interest to "force" (which I doubt could ever happen) adult companies to use the .xxx domains to allow this "dirty content" to be easily censored, and create a "red light district" of the internet, which you could just easily block with a simple wildcard filter. Fortunately, most of the censors are idiots and would rather put their head in the sand than acknowledge it exists and there is no way to get rid of it, since there will always be demand.

    Either way, whatever ICANN approves or disapproves the usage of .xxx domains, it won't make a difference either way. The internet will be full of porn, everybody who wants it will be able to get it, and .xxx will continue to be unused, whether it's available or not.

  9. Re:FINALLY by Kitkoan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally there will be porn on the internet.

    Took them long enough!

    Wow... mom was right, you will go blind if you play with it...

    --
    Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
  10. Re:So... by Threni · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really you want a default null tld so Slashdot.org would just be slashdot. I don't care where a site is based, whether it's for profit or not. I want to just type:

    slashdot
    ubuntuforums
    bbc

    etc and not try and guess/remember whether they're: .com .net .org .co.uk .org.uk

    etc etc. The distinction is meaningless to me.

  11. Re:Joking? Satire? by jkauzlar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Step 1) Introduce tld .xxx

    Step 2) Pass law that says, any site with porn must be in .xxx tld

    Step 3) Block .xxx domain

    Step 4) Totalitarianism

  12. Re:Finally by BobMcD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hopefully, this is a sign that our policies are not dictated by the "Think of the children" crowd.

    To be honest, this could easily be made to be pro 'think of the children'. If suddenly it is designed that porn sites are to have the .xxx domain name then you can easily put on a very basic (even just OS Parental Controls) to just refuse to load .xxx domains. Its 'thinking of the children' as suddenly porn sites are easily identifiable and blockable since they all (in theory) be .xxx domains (like how most governments sites are expected to be .gov)

    And I'd think that even the porn people would be on board with this. The kinds of people that want porn blocked in certain situations are the same kinds that are willing to pay for it in other, more private situations.

  13. Re:So... by BobMcD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really you want a default null tld so Slashdot.org would just be slashdot. I don't care where a site is based, whether it's for profit or not. I want to just type:

    slashdot
    ubuntuforums
    bbc

    etc and not try and guess/remember whether they're: .com .net .org .co.uk .org.uk

    etc etc. The distinction is meaningless to me.

    The distinction doesn't exist solely to help you mentally organize sites. It exists because DNS reads from right to left, and it has to start somewhere. Otherwise there would be no way to organize them.

  14. Religous Right by nuckfuts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Members of the American religious right also oppose its creation on moral grounds.

    I respect freedom of opinion, but this attitude is plain fucking stupid. As if pornography will become more/less prevalent if the .xxx tld is approved/denied.

    This is the same brand of ignorance that believes teens will have more sex if educated about it, or that prostitution should be outlawed instead of regulated.

    As a species, we wouldn't still be here if sex wasn't a big deal to us, but the range of cultural attitudes today is astounding. There's Amsterdam, where one can window shop for sexual services. There are ultra-religious societies where women must be covered from head-to-toe since, presumably, their men could not control themselves in the presence of exposed female flesh. There are countries where women have their genitals mutilated to prevent the enjoyment of sex. And there is America, where murder and violence are standard fare for entertainment, but God help us all if a nipple pops out!

  15. Not quite aptly named by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 3, Funny

    I always thought that if business sites were .com, then porn sites should be .cum

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  16. New TLDs like printing money by peterofoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems to me that creating a new TLD is like printing money. Anyone with a brand to protect will be coerced into buying up their {brand}.{TLD} to park it and prevent abuse. Consider for example: www.disney.xxx or www.ford.xxx Creating this won't eliminate porn on the other TLDs and centralized censorship is generally a bad idea.

  17. Re:So... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Funny

    If google.xxx is what I think it would be, it could perhaps be the best website on the Internet.

    I'm pretty sure that will be 'googal.xxx'.

  18. Re:So... by RichardJenkins · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have you tried just typing those words into your browser?

    In mine (FF3.5) it take me straight through to the site using (I think...) Googles 'I feel lucky' feature. This way, typing in a keyword has a good chance of taking you to the site you want. If people could register single keyword domains like that, I reckon it would cause a net decrease in convenience as more and more single keywords take you directly through to someone's site.

    With email, it's usually copy/paste for me, or just entering the first part of an address I've used before. I guess it could be useful, but probably not useful enough to warrant the 'search by keyword taking you to someones site' issue above.

  19. Re:So... by XanC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    PROTIP: There's more to the Internet than the Web.

  20. 14 years later by mbone · · Score: 3, Informative

    This was discussed a lot in 1996 in the IETF NewDom Working Group, which I participated in, and which partially lead to the creation of ICANN. What a zoo that was - it ended with Eugene Kashpureff going to jail for attacking the DNS root servers. For some reason, ".xxx" seemed to drive people crazy, and I am not sure it is much different today.

  21. Re:So... by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been saying this for years. Most people don't know about the different TLDs, and because of that most popular sites buy up the other TLDs that match their domainname to prevent people from squatting there, and they redirect (or not) the traffic to their "proper" TLD. Take for example http://slashdot.org/ http://slashdot.com/ http://slashdot.net./

    I've always held that country code TLDs are of value. It sucks to do some online searching to buy something and end up at a .com address that is in the UK.

    Actually, I don't dare type a URL in my location bar that is not already in my history and/or bookmarks that is automatically completed. Too dangerous if you misspell the sucker. Google is the real DNS provider. Sometimes names aren't what they would think they are either. EG, its not bmw.com, its bmwusa.com.

    To belabor this stupid point further. WTF is up with .name and .museum ? TLDs have digressed from their original goal. To simplify and classify things. I mean, how is slashdot.org really a .org anymore? Its a commercial entity. What was ever the point of .net? .biz? And then countries sell off their TLDs like .to, .fm, and .tv, and those are rarely used.

    Google (or similar) is the authoritative TLD master, the rest is just novelty.

  22. Re:So... by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Good point. Why does google safe search have a setting that "blocks web pages containing explicit sexual content from appearing in search results" when what I want is a setting that blocks web pages that don't contain explicit sexual content from appearing in search results!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.