ICANN Approves .XXX

lothos writes "Pornography will have its own top-level domain, dot-XXX, the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers decided today." Ars Technica has a short but thoroughly-linked article tracing some of the long history (in Internet time) behind the push for .xxx. See also ICANN's announcement of the approval, and — for all the juicy details — the rationale behind the decision (PDF).

Comments

It's a good decision

[viablos]

Even while the porn sites most likely won't move from .com or .net, it makes it nice and easy to bing only .xxx domains.

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody wants to see CmdrTaco's "taco".

Re:It's a good decision

[GameboyRMH]

Yeah Bing should turn up those .xxx domains shortly after Google does...

Re:It's a good decision

[LiquidCoooled]

I guess you did not put much thought into this comment.

Re:It's a good decision

[NeuroKoan]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

No, we can't.

Re:It's a good decision

[GameboyRMH]

Protip: Check his post history

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

"Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?"

OH GOD MY EYES

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

What happens if they are forced to move? And who decides what xxx means? I'm sure the mafiaa would like all torrent search sites forced to use a xxx tld.

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

I don't think I want to know what Cowboy Neil looks like nude...

And I assure you, you don't want to know what I look like!

Re:It's a good decision

[Locke2005]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

Wait... have you cornered the eye-bleach market?

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Protip: Check his post history

Microsoft shill or just seriously deluded? I can't decide.

Re:It's a good decision

[No Grand Plan]

Then www.f*ck.com will once again become available.

Yay. I'm bidding.

Re:It's a good decision

[kherge]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

No, we can't.

You mean no we won't.

Re:It's a good decision

[dgatwood]

Even while the porn sites most likely won't move from .com or .net

I wouldn't be so sure. The porn sites, from what I've heard, want to be in a .xxx domain so that they can be blocked more easily. Why? Because that gives them protection against future bills like COPA that would be much more burdensome for them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a lot of porn sites will continue to maintain their .com or .net domains, but I'd imagine they will quickly be modified so that each page redirects you to the same page in the .xxx domain. It's easy enough to set up a web server to do that.

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

I think you're thinking of 4chan.org/soc/

Re:It's a good decision

[_0xd0ad]

I hope he's at least making money off it.

Re:It's a good decision

[GameboyRMH]

Microsoft shill. And this guy's a professional. He gets first posts with alarming frequency, and when he gets modded down, huge numbers of mod points are spent to mod him back up, so he's either running karma whore accounts or he's part of a group.

Re:It's a good decision

[kat_skan]

Btw, could we have slashdot.xxx, where slashdot users can upload their nude pictures?

No, we can't.

You mean no we won't.

It's not like it could be any more awful than idle.

Re:It's a good decision

[Dunbal]

But we already have goatse - what more do you want?

Re:It's a good decision

[BasilBrush]

Viablos is a sock puppet of devxo, a Microsoft shill.

Re:It's a good decision

[Tubal-Cain]

CowboyNeal

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Not funny, man. My brother died that way.

Re:It's a good decision

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Picture the Tron guy, then ask that question again.

Re:It's a good decision

[larry bagina]

if you've seen goatse, you've seen cowboy neil.

Re:It's a good decision

[Gerzel]

The problem is the next push will probably be to force porn sites to move to .xxx and institute general blocking measures.

Also what goes on .xxx, well if it regulated that 'pornographic' sites must be on .xxx and no where else then it will be anything that can be passed as porno from gangbangs to gay and lesbian forums, to sexual health advice.

Re:It's a good decision

[Kosi]

Yikes! I doubt that more than 0,01 percent of the /. readers will want to see nude images of other /. users, even when you ignore the 95% that would upload a goatse picture.

Re:It's a good decision

[Kosi]

Shouldn't that be eaten by some Kathleen already?

Re:It's a good decision

[Kosi]

goatse'd by CowboyNeal?

Re:It's a good decision

[Seumas]

The great internet nerfing of 2011+, where we sanitize everything for the safety of pwecious wittle eyes has finally begun. Next step is to enforce a requirement that all "obscene" content be moved to xxx (and we all know how "obscene" is so loosely and meaninglessly defined). After that, simply using vulgar language or questionable images and comments online becomes a crime of corrupting a minor. Someome, please monitor my children as I'm incapable of parenting and accepting the world for what it is! Change everything to fit around my pwecious wittle baby!

Re:It's a good decision

[Kosi]

That just leads to a page wanting me to leave a comment without any subject to comment on, while hindering me to do that with a stupid captcha. No naked people there. WTF?

Re:It's a good decision

[dgatwood]

As long as sites voluntarily choose to segregate themselves, I doubt that any forcing will occur. To that end, it's in the best interest of the 'net for sites to be self-policing. When the 'net isn't, then government tends to step in and make a mess of things.

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

you must be doing it wrong

Re:It's a good decision

[$0.02]

Uranus

Re:It's a good decision

[countertrolling]

Microsoft shill.

<United States Air Force>

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

More like ChoirboyKneel

Re:It's a good decision

[slashdottedjoe]

No need to force them. They will need to grab the .xxx anyway or somebody else will get it. Then they put the content on the .xxx and keep the .com with the page blank or non-pornographic.

We all get to help, if we use such sites by abstaining from using any site with a live .com and only go to the .xxx. No force required, but the effect would be the same. I do not find porn offensive in general, but I do not feel children should have access. Having a .xxx domain would make filtering for kids a hell of a lot more successful. Plus, that benefits such sites by taking away the "for the children" reasoning to ban all Internet porn.

Re:It's a good decision

[russotto]

I wouldn't be so sure. The porn sites, from what I've heard, want to be in a .xxx domain so that they can be blocked more easily. Why? Because that gives them protection against future bills like COPA that would be much more burdensome for them.

That would be exceptionally foolish. Because a future step is for ISPs to block .xxx by default, requiring users to explicitly opt-in to have access to it. And that would be death for any site on the domain.

Re:It's a good decision

[whimmel]

The porn sites, from what I've heard, want to be in a .xxx domain so that they can be blocked more easily. Why? Because that gives them protection against future bills like COPA that would be much more burdensome for them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a lot of porn sites will continue to maintain their .com or .net domains, but I'd imagine they will quickly be modified so that each page redirects you to the same page in the .xxx domain. It's easy enough to set up a web server to do that.

This must be why many members of the porn industry showed up to protest.

Re:It's a good decision

[h4rm0ny]

I don't believe he can be a shill. It's just too bone-headed. More like a False Flag agent. Reasons? Idiocy like ramming Bing references into an irrelevant post. I actually use Bing as my default, but I don't go around saying: "hey - just bing it!" for the very simple reason it sounds STOOPID!

If MS employed PR people to big them up online (who knows? Apple is the one that I'd first suspect of that) then they'd surely keep an eye on them enough to spot ones that were as obvious - and thus self-damaging - as this. I think it's either one of three things:

1. Misguided MS employee going nuts. Unlikely imo, because (a) low-level people at a business aren't usually that fanatical and high-level people wouldn't be wasting their time spamming Slashdot. Also, if they were really motivated purely by adoration of MS, they would follow-up their initial efforts by arguing with the people who disagreed. Such is the nature of fanaticism.
2. Genuine MS Fanboy. Linux has them. Apple has them. Certainly no reason MS can't have them. I've ended up defending MS on Slashdot quite a few times myself recently (unpaid, however. ;). I think this one is also unlikely again because of the lack of follow-up. The grabbing of first posts and lack of follow-up elsewhere suggests trolling.
3. False Flag / Troll. My best guess. The behaviour is certainly trollish. The main question is whether the motivation is either to create the impression that MS is paying them as a shill in order to damage MS, or whether they just have identified Slashdot as a site with a few rabidly anti-MS types and find this a good way of trolling. I'm leaning toward the former motivation because they could be more trolling if they followed up on the posts, whilst the absence of follow-up or denials of being a shill, suggests an attempt to create the impression of shilling.

Of course there is possibility 4. which is that they are indeed a shill, just an incompetent one. Someone who shuffles off at the end of the day and says to their manager "I mentioned Bing in a first post, my $100 bonus, please". That would just be sad.

So I think 1 and 2 unlikely. 3 my guess, 4 an outside chance. If it's 4, then that's just shameful to make money that way and his / her manager needs to keep a better eye on them. If it's 3 as seems likely, then that's just really, really, tragically sad. It's bad enough to rabidly identify with an OS unless you have a hand in its development. But it's really awful to get so fanatical you start trying to wage a PR campaign against your "enemy".

Re:It's a good decision

[JohnRoss1968]

True but it also makes it easy for ISPs and the like to just BLOCK all .xxx domains.
And of course they will justify it by claiming to do it "For the children" or "For God" or "For the Public Good"
Hell I wouldn't put it past them to do it "To stop the terrorists"

Re:It's a good decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Rather than bidding on all the domains covered by that wildcard, you might want to limit it to www.f[a,e,i,o,u,y]ck.com.

Re:It's a good decision

[jmorris42]

Be careful what you wish for. I have been warning in every /. thread on this subject and will say it one last time now that it is a done deal. Watch how fast .xxx is blocked by default by ISPs and must be 'opted in' by the customer. Then watch how fast every other domain becomes a Disney Hell because anyone posting objectionable content there gets sued for 'endangering the children' since .xxx exists. Refer again to that first prediction. Anything that isn't Disney safe is behind an opt-in wall and there won't be an option to opt-in most places. No cyber-cafes, no hotels, no McDonalds. Few workplaces, no government sites including schools. Libraries already have opt-in because we had to deal with CIPA and the maze of regulations and funding tangled in with it so won't be affected.

Re:It's a good decision

[BeanThere]

As long as those 'general blocking measures' remain in private institutions like corporations, and not government censorship, I don't see that that's a problem .. employees shouldn't really be using company computers and bandwidth to browse porn anyway, and .xxx would be easier to block.

well if it regulated that 'pornographic' sites must be on .xxx and no where else

"If"? Is someone proposing that? If so, then sure, I would heavily disagree with that, that would be a major problem, but I don't see the leap from the creation of .xxx to such an assumption.

A 21 exploding head salute

[Anonymous Coward]

Across the country conservative right wing heads just exploded.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[mr100percent]

Not really, the argument was that it would make filtering slightly simpler in the future by blocking the entire TLD (as well as existing .com porn sites). I don't think conservatives would have a problem with that.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[DNS-and-BIND]

Really? You sure about that? Not just putting words in the opposition's mouth, as happens so often these days?

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Nrrqshrr]

While dictators are much happier now. Now that's just one domain to block.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Anonymous Coward]

More like exploding heads in the opposition's mouth. Let's try to keep this discussion on-topic!

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[glwtta]

would make filtering slightly simpler in the future by blocking the entire TLD (as well as existing .com porn sites)

How does blocking something new, in addition to what you're blocking already, make filtering easier?

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Gerzel]

by forcing what there is already to move to the new.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Kosi]

Then why are the conservatives so much against .xxx?

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[veganboyjosh]

Isn't the GP's point similar to the idea that the new US dollar bills with the larger portraits and watermarks are supposed to discourage counterfitting. If merchants and banks are still accepting the old, easier to counterfit bills, then counterfitters will just print those instead of the newer ones...

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[paiute]

Not really, the argument was that it would make filtering slightly simpler in the future by blocking the entire TLD (as well as existing .com porn sites). I don't think conservatives would have a problem with that.

If you think they are going to stop there, you haven't been paying attention.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Anonymous Coward]

Nowadays counterfeiters could just print a bill with a picture of Al Gore on it. They've changed the designs so often, people would just assume it was a new design and accept it.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[mr100percent]

Citation? If anything, there is a call by some social conservatives to shove all porn to .xxx domains so they can be easily filtered, and another more libertarian call to not have the government mess with the internet.

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[Kosi]

Wasn't it that so many of your republicans being so opposite to .xxx because that would make "smut" somehow legitimate?

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[mr100percent]

again, citation? Never heard that before

Re:A 21 exploding head salute

[zarthrag]

"The Bush administration is objecting to the creation of a .xxx domain, saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography." http://news.cnet.com/2100-1028_3-5833764.html

One of many, I'm sure. The conservative arguments about porn have historically been contrary to common sense. When it comes to sex, giving kids access to condoms and vaccines against STDs is immoral, but teaching abstinence and watching the teen pregnancy rate soar is just fine. With porn, it's easier to deny that it exists (or place the burden of filtering upon ISPs, or grant the govt the power to snoop through your internet records to search for pedo material) than it is to simply allow them all to (voluntairly!) migrate to an easily filtered domain.

What's sad, virtually everyone else - ESPECIALLY THE INDUSTRY - wants this. Few people are *trying* to show that stuff to children. Only the producers of (highly ineffective) blocking software stands to lose here.

And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx

[commodore6502]

Just as they filtered-out Usenet because "it's used to spread porn", and they filter out Spice Channel from their cable services (unless you pay extra).
Dang.

Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx

[Kosi]

What ISP really filters Usenet (in terms of restricting access to certain newsgroups although they are offered by your Usenet provider)? It's not an ISP's duty to run a Usenet server.

Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx

[cpu6502]

>>>It's not an ISP's duty to run a Usenet server.

They always have in the past. Providing a Usenet and Email server was part of the service, dating all the way to the early 90s. It's only recently that has changed.

Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx

[Kosi]

Even back in the early 90ies, I saw my ISP in the role of providing me access to the Internet, and nothing else. That most of them provided Usenet, email, and other services, was a nice add-on, but not part of the deal.

Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx

[Cimexus]

My ISP still offers Usenet thankfully (including binaries with >500 days retention). Though I do admit its one of a dying breed. :(

5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

Countdown to criminalization of all non-.xxx porn.

Re:5..4...3...

[Holammer]

One can dream eh? Imagine how easy it'd be to filter searches. Even seemingly innocuous searches return a bunch of porn links nowadays. .XXX should have been there from the start.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

So what if someone were to use some .xxx sites for non-porn? Will this to be illegal too?

Re:5..4...3...

[Dunbal]

Countdown to criminalization of all non-.xxx porn.

Well I agree that soft porn SHOULD be criminal... oh wait

Re:5..4...3...

[thue]

Not just porn. How long will it be before somebody insists that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_penis only be available from .xxx?

Re:5..4...3...

[h4rr4r]

Please STFU. What is and is not porn is very hard to define and your ideas will only result in more and more violations of peoples rights to free speech.

Re:5..4...3...

[Penguinisto]

Countdown to criminalization of all non-.xxx porn.

All you'd have to do first is define "porn" (and by that, I mean defining it a whole lot more objectively than a former Supreme Court Justice when his answer was: "I'll know it when I see it!")

Oh, and then you'd have to get that definition ratified across a zillion countries (and by that, I mean countries ranging from Saudi Arabia to Holland).

And, once you manage to get all that in place, and manage to actually get some sort of universal "criminalization" going, you and I both know full well that approximately 40 jillion pr0n site 'entrepreneurs' will start devising (successfully) ways of skirting that semi-ban.

Then you get to start the process all over again to counter those loopholes.

Sorta like how we've been fighting spam all this time, really - except that you get to wrestle with politicians while you do it. As someone who does e-mail administration, I'll stick with the Bayesian filter tweaking and RBL upkeeps, because what I have to mess with suddenly looks a whole lot easier by comparison.

Re:5..4...3...

[Lifyre]

How does "A website with a primary or secondary purpose of providing entertainment through real or simulated erotic media. Erotic includes but is not limited to exposed genitals and sexual acts. Media includes but is not limited to images, videos, and audio files."

Not perfect, will certainly be abused, but could be a starting point for something like this. I don't think 4chan should be forced on to .xxx but tube8 probably could be.

Or people could just leave it the hell alone, we have a new TLD that can provide an easy way to sort things should people want to.

Re:5..4...3...

[Gerzel]

not really. You don't have to have an international effort. The TLD servers really are controlled from the US. Yes some would slip around but more likely the ones that actually are worth while and do a service, such as education, or provide a community for people of differing sexuality will not.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

Violation of free speech? what about my rights to have a clean search and not have to worry about my children seeing things that I don't want them to see. I don't care if anyone looks at porn but just don't have it hidden in tricky URLs. At least if you have a .xxx it would be obvious no mater the name they give it.

Re:5..4...3...

[LordLucless]

If they're allowed on .XXX, their free speech isn't being violated.

Re:5..4...3...

[_Sprocket_]

One can dream eh? Imagine how easy it'd be to filter searches. Even seemingly innocuous searches return a bunch of porn links nowadays. .XXX should have been there from the start.

What the hell are you searching for? The only time I'm getting anything pornographic is when I'm searching for something pornographic. And then it usually takes an image search.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody will ever make that argument work. Government regulation of the human penis in the context of an encyclopedia would almost certainly fail standards for free speech regulation. The standards for obscenity may be ambiguous because of the "community standards" prong, but the ambiguity doesn't extend to wikipedia.

Re:5..4...3...

[blair1q]

All you'd have to do first is define "porn" (and by that, I mean defining it a whole lot more objectively than a former Supreme Court Justice when his answer was: "I'll know it when I see it!")

Well, no, you don't.

Before the Internet, porn was confined to stores specializing in it, and to controlled locations in stores. Everyone knew what not to put out on the magazine rack where the nanny-squad could imagine a child getting his hands on it. And the definition was pretty much what you quoted there.

They still do it that way out in brick-and-mortar land. Just nobody notices the porn out there any more, because we're all inured to it by the mass quantities available in plain sight on the Interwebs.

Re:5..4...3...

[h4rr4r]

Define secondary purpose? Would the fact that some folks jerk it to the best cancer website be enough? Or maybe wikipedia for its articles on medical things?

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

except for the ones that aren't...

Try again.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's probably the only reason it got approved.

Re:5..4...3...

[h4rr4r]

Bullshit, this is like saying that free speech in a free speech zone is good enough. The constitution seems to indicate the whole nation is a free speech zone.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

How does "A website with a primary or secondary purpose of providing entertainment through real or simulated erotic media. Erotic includes but is not limited to exposed genitals and sexual acts. Media includes but is not limited to images, videos, and audio files."

Pathetic.

• Your primary purpose and secondary purpose wording is vague. Is blogger.com a website or is each individual account a website? Because it's clear that neither the primary nor secondary purpose of Blogger is porn and yet it's clear that many individual blogs hosted there are dedicated to that purpose. Hell, it could even be argued that Playboy doesn't meet your definition because a large portion of their site is dedicated to other forms of entertainment for men and the media that's available for free is mostly topless-only solo stuff that doesn't meet your definition of erotic media.)
• By your definition of erotic, this would be porn. As would just about every Hollwood sex scene, since it's a simulated sexual act.
• Audio files, really? Can you seriously make a case for any audio-only file being classified as porn?

Way to go there champ, I think you nailed it.

Re:5..4...3...

[JustOK]

so, you WANT little children to see pictures of a PENIS???? You. Are. Sick.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Little boys must be protected from mirrors - at all costs!

We're currently still in the process of deciding whether cutting off their penises or gouging out their eyes would be more practical solutions to this desperate situation.

Re:5..4...3...

[LordLucless]

No, it's more like bitching that because a cinema kicks you out when you start making a political speech in the middle of a movie, your free speech is being abridged. You can say whatever you want, but nobody has to provide you with a forum to say it.

Are you complaining because you're not allowed to put your blog on .mil, .gov, .edu? The situation is just the same.

Re:5..4...3...

[shentino]

Followed by the .xxx registry charging 100s of bucks for domain registration and renewal.

Re:5..4...3...

[Lifyre]

I was thinking along the lines of percentage of content not intent of the material. So if erotic material was in the top 2 as a percentage of content then it would qualify.

As I said it would very easily be abused. Especially if you talk about a retailer like Victoria's Secret.

I personally don't think we needed .xxx but don't have an issue with it existing either.

Re:5..4...3...

[shentino]

ICANN controls the internet through it's IANA function, and it is headquartered in the US.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, not all pornography wants to be "porn" or "xxx". Some wants to be erotica, some wants to be soft-core, some wants to be tasteful pictures of artistic nudes, etc. And "naturist" sites won't want to even be classified as pornography. That's the whole problem with "xxx" domain I think, it is going to imply the worst of the lot.

Re:5..4...3...

[Kjella]

Yes, but internationally the definition varies and is .xxx really .xxx.us? Of course we agree on certain things but let's take this BluRay as example. In Germany that's ok for 16+ year olds, it's not pornography which has an 18yo limit. Would you sell this to a 16yo in the US? My impression would be no.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

If the US starts forcing rules on other countries, it won't control the TLDs for very long. That's a recipe for fragmentation, and methinks they know it.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

The magazine rack at the gas station is totally controlled.

Re:5..4...3...

[EdIII]

It godamn better be.

If I type in thousandislanddressing.xxx into a web browser I am not looking for salad recipes.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

gouge out their eyes, better to skull fuck them!

Re:5..4...3...

[Mr. Freeman]

Separate but equal, right? You know, I seem to remember the supreme court having something to say about this. (Brown V. board of education)

Re:5..4...3...

[bill_mcgonigle]

what about my rights to have a clean search

'Clean' is only specific to your personal beliefs. The world cannot accommodate 7 billion different views on the Web (at least yet). Besides, you're talking about so-called 'positive rights' which demand the labor of others, for free. That's slavery and morally reprehensible.

and not have to worry about my children seeing things that I don't want them to see.

Oh, I see, you want somebody else to do the parenting for you. Cripes, subscribe to some whitelist software if that's what you want.

Re:5..4...3...

[LordLucless]

Uh-huh, because race and wanting to put up a pornographic website is an oranges to oranges comparison, right? Maybe you should sue ICANN over .mil and racial discrimination?

Re:5..4...3...

[lwsimon]

Except the governing body here doesn't own the other TLDs.

Re:5..4...3...

[UBfusion]

It will become illegal as soon as major sites (cnn, bbc, zdnet) start using it to attract clicks :-)

Re:5..4...3...

[palegray.net]

I am not looking for salad recipes

I'm guessing you would be more interested in the term as it applies to "tossing."

Good heavens, a Slashdot article where that's actually on topic... what is the world coming to?

Re:5..4...3...

[h4rm0ny]

No, it's more like bitching that because a cinema kicks you out when you start making a political speech in the middle of a movie, your free speech is being abridged. You can say whatever you want, but nobody has to provide you with a forum to say it.

Your domain = your forum. Their domain = their forum. You're talking about telling people where they can and can't have their forums and who can access those forums.

Re:5..4...3...

[Anonymous Coward]

TLD's are not a content classification system. The fact that this TLD was approved sends the wrong message to would-be censors. ICANN fails yet again.

Re:5..4...3...

[LordLucless]

Their TLDs - their forums.

And no, it's not "where". You're being told what arbitrary designation you're allowed to apply to your forum - .com vs .xxx. "Locations" on the web are just analogies. It's not like a geographical location in meatspace. It's just a mapping of characters to IP addresses.

Re:5..4...3...

[RealGrouchy]

The Ars article suggests that the domain would be restricted to adult websites. (How they can enforce this once it's been registered, I don't know)

- RG>

Re:5..4...3...

[NewWorldDan]

Depending on pricing, that's going to be one of the first things I do. Bye bye NewWorldDan@vanitydomain.net, hello NewWorldDan@vanitydomain.xxx.

There will also be pictures of puppies. And maybe kittens. We'll see.

Re:5..4...3...

[jmorris42]

You have not been paying attention. .xxx isn't the beginning. A dozen existing but mostly ignored tlds are intended as classification domains. doesn't matter long term though. Just wait, sooner or later the morons win and they get what the marketing drones have wanted and this problem goes away. Because they have a dream... they want their AOL keywords back. Sooner or later, everything in the root domain.

Re:5..4...3...

[Mr. Slippery]

Erotic includes but is not limited to exposed genitals and sexual acts.

So an anatomy book is erotica? A book about sexual health, displaying the rashes caused by STDs, is erotica? A catalog of a museum exhibit of shunga prints is erotica?

Re:5..4...3...

[BeanThere]

Look, I grew up entirely in the days 'before the Internet', and I promise you that as a child, we had plenty of ways to get access to porn. Getting some of those magazines down from the high shelves? Trivial! Where there's a will there's a way. I don't ever remember any 'nanny-squad' ever busting us for any kind of porn either.

And that was before the Internet. It is pure la-la-land denial if anyone thinks they can somehow even remotely prevent their children from seeing plenty of porn in their childhood.

Amazingly, none of us that I know who grew up looking at porn seems to have been screwed up or harmed by it, they all seem like well-adjusted adults in healthy relationships etc.

Re:5..4...3...

[Lifyre]

I was trying to take a stab at a reasonable definition. I think the whole idea of legislating this is idiotic but I'll play some more.

If all the anatomy book has is pictures of genitals then perhaps but even a reproductive anatomy book would have more than muff shots. If the entire museum was shunga prints then it could easily be considered that way but again last I checked most museums have more than one exhibit.

Also you seemed to miss part of the definition. "A website with a primary or secondary purpose of providing entertainment through real or simulated erotic media." Anatomy and STD books are for education...

Re:5..4...3...

[Gerzel]

As an American. NO the they in control do NOT know it.

Re:5..4...3...

[DanTheStone]

There is no right not to be offended.

Re:5..4...3...

[thomasdz]

My dad was an ornithologist... I do lots of searches for "boobies" expecting the large seabird. Imagine my surprise when.....

At last!

[Anonymous Coward]

I always had trouble finding porn on the internet before, what with there being so little of it out there. This will make it so much easier to find now! Thanks Internet!

Re:At last!

[UBfusion]

This brings a whole new meaning to "Yes, I can"...

Icahn approves of XXX

[Anonymous Coward]

It's spelled Icahn. And really, who doesn't?

Re:Icahn approves of XXX

[Kosi]

Just read the link. That guy paid some millions for one animal with less than 100 kg edible flesh on it. Seems not to be the sanest person around.

Re:It's a decision

[knarfling]

It is an old decision. I had a look at the article and saw that it was dated June 10, 2010.
It was also posted on /. back in June.
Haven't really looked for any .xxx domains, but if /. is not aware of them by now, how much can they be used?
On the other hand, it took nine months for the dupe to show up. Coincidence?

Fucking stupid morons

[h4rm0ny]

This accomplishes only a few things that I can see:
1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a .xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.
2. Falsely creates a sense of safety amongst idiots who think they can block .xxx and filter out "the bad stuff".
3. Creates a sense of unjustified expectation amongst a different set of idiots who immediately decide that just because ICANN has created this TLD, that any site they deem improper that operates outside the hierarchy is engaged in some terrible underhandedness for daring to do so, trying to expose innocent people to their content.
4. Instantly tars anyone who visits a site in .xxx domain in the eyes of moralisers and authority groups, regardless of whether the site is donkeyporn.xxx or just some site that was pushed to register under .xxx because it deals with mature topics.
5. Creates artificial segregation along lines decided by minority moral bodies. I.e. sexual content has to be treated differently. We don't have a separate TLD for religion, or science - why must sex be so treated?
6. Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere.

I'll leave it to the reader to consider how that last consequence was balanced against the others...

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

i cant get donkeyporn.xxx to work is it having problems?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Aye.

Reading TFA, it seems that conservatives are against it, free speech advocates are against it, even the porn industry is against it. Who is in favor of it at all?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[wmbetts]

ICANNs bank accounts

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[cstdenis]

Reading TFA, it seems that conservatives are against it, free speech advocates are against it, even the porn industry is against it. Who is in favor of it at all?

The registrars.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a .xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.

3. Creates a sense of unjustified expectation amongst a different set of idiots who immediately decide that just because ICANN has created this TLD, that any site they deem improper that operates outside the hierarchy is engaged in some terrible underhandedness for daring to do so, trying to expose innocent people to their content.

5. Creates artificial segregation along lines decided by minority moral bodies. I.e. sexual content has to be treated differently. We don't have a separate TLD for religion, or science - why must sex be so treated?

I've lumped these together as they're all basically the same point. I have some sympathy with the concern but can't help feeling that dotxxx will be handled in much the same way as dotnet and dotorg, i.e. a chance to sell the same word to the same person one more time. I am not convinced that it will be possible for anyone to argue that porn.com should be moved to porn.xxx because it is misleading. This may be the first step but slippery slopes have a habit of drying up in the warm light of day.

2. Falsely creates a sense of safety amongst idiots who think they can block .xxx and filter out "the bad stuff".

People will generally be aware that this is not sufficient and the manufacturers of porn blocking software will heartily take on the burden of spreading this message. And filtering out a lot of the more obvious stuff is useful even though it's not comprehensive. Of course, Google already does this rather well. The only sites this will hit are non-adult sites which carry adult advertising.

4. Instantly tars anyone who visits a site in .xxx domain in the eyes of moralisers and authority groups, regardless of whether the site is donkeyporn.xxx or just some site that was pushed to register under .xxx because it deals with mature topics.

You mean in the same way that having dirty keywords in your browsing history does? Who's watching what I'm doing on the net and why have they not already judged me? I just don't see how this would work.

6. Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere.

Yeah, that stinks. That's the main thing that's wrong with this and the only real reason it's happening.

I'll leave it to the reader to consider how that last consequence was balanced against the others...

Did I get it right?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Treating sex like it is something terrible is a legacy from christianity.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[blair1q]

It does one more thing.

7. You can finally spell goatse.xxx right

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words: You have a porn site and stand to lose a shit-ton of money from people no longer able to stumble upon your smut. Gotcha.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[alostpacket]

Spot on. I'm wondering where's the .graphicviolence domain? Surely naked bodies procreating is less of a moral concern than violence, right? I mean humans were made in God's image, right? (well, ok, not all of them, but Summer Glau is, and so is that photoshopped.... err nevermind)

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Kosi]

While I understand most of the points you want to make:

1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a .xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.

There should be no pressure in any way, but I'd really like a TLD where I can expect that every subdomain really hosts porn.

2. Falsely creates a sense of safety amongst idiots who think they can block .xxx and filter out "the bad stuff".

That's like filtering .com and expecting you wont' see anything commercial. Besides: "Safety" and "idiots" in one sentence, really?

3. Creates a sense of unjustified expectation amongst a different set of idiots who immediately decide that just because ICANN has created this TLD, that any site they deem improper that operates outside the hierarchy is engaged in some terrible underhandedness for daring to do so, trying to expose innocent people to their content.

Noone expects that sites with commercial interest are only .com, so why should they expect porn to be only under .xxx?

4. Instantly tars anyone who visits a site in .xxx domain in the eyes of moralisers and authority groups, regardless of whether the site is donkeyporn.xxx or just some site that was pushed to register under .xxx because it deals with mature topics.

That's not a problem of the existence of an .xxx TLD, it's a problem of governments controlled or influenced by idiots believing porn was a bad thing.

5. Creates artificial segregation along lines decided by minority moral bodies. I.e. sexual content has to be treated differently. We don't have a separate TLD for religion, or science - why must sex be so treated?

I would not object a .science or a .religion TLD (as long as we keep scientology and some others from registering a .religion domain)

6. Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere.

Just usual registration fees and a mechanism that wields out domain grabbers (which is needed for every TLD) would be sufficient.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[LordLucless]

If there was a sizable body of such material on the net, you can be people probably would be pushing for that. I mean, you can occasionally find suicide photos, or alleged crime scene photos or some such if frequent particularly sick forums, but the quantity is many orders of magnitude less than porn on the net.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

'goatse.cx' was never supposed to be 'goat sex'.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed, nonsens i say! -while quickly registering donkeyporn.xxx-

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[tokul]

1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a .xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.

No presure at all. Free speech laws don't allow nuts to take down "immoral" sites. The only purpose of new top level domain is that somebody has problems selling random 64 letter groups and they want to increase their profits.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[the_womble]

I think consequence no 6 "Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere. " is what they are after.

I cannot see effective criminalisation of porn on non-XXX domains: too many free speech issues, and there will be well funded push-back from established sites that use other TLDs.

You are going to see all the porn sites on .xxx in the same way that all businesses use .biz or all airlines use .aero

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Good points, but what is the difference between 1 and 3?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Noughmad]

I don't know... when was the last time you saw a movie (like in cinema or on TV) or a video game?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[LordLucless]

Simulated/Animated Violence != Real Violence
Porn = Real Sex

I mean, it's not realistic sex, but it is actual intercourse taking place.

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Anonymous Coward]

I would not object a .science or a .religion TLD (as long as we keep scientology and some others from registering a .religion domain)

So, Scientology having a .science domain would be fine then?

Re:Fucking stupid morons

[Zeikzeil]

Wasn't this the reason anyone wanted .xxx?

yay

[DarkofPeace]

Time for the gold rush. dibs on yourmom.xxx

Re:yay

[TheWanderingHermit]

I'm not going for .xxx. I figure porn is a business so I'm using .com until they do it right and I can use .cum.

Re:yay

[DarkofPeace]

I like it...

Re:yay

[Anonymous Coward]

>> yourmom.xxx

Everyone's already had that one.

Re:yay

[GaryOlson]

You really need to learn how to make it last longer.
.orgasm

Re:yay

[TheWanderingHermit]

What about .ccccccuuuuuuuuummmmmm?

(Hey, have you ever tried screaming "orgasm" intelligibly at that point?)

Re:yay

[Noughmad]

You have a point, too bad asm.org is already taken :(

Re:yay

[internettoughguy]

You have a point, too bad asm.org is already taken :(

Ha ha, the American Society for Microbiology, how appropriate.

For ALL the juicy details?

[_0xd0ad]

and — for all the juicy details — the rationale behind the decision (PDF).

I take it there are pictures?

Get ready for new proposal from the feds

[mysidia]

Ban of porn web sites and e-mail senders not properly labelled under the .XXX TLD.

Oblig.

[jackdub]

goatse.xxx anyone???

Or perhaps horsese.xxx is more your fancy!

Re:Oblig.

[RussellSHarris]

If it's not the same old goatse non-xxx that I've already seen a million times, sure... not from work, of course. From the privacy of my room, with the door locked.

(Better click that Post Anonymously box...)

Re:Oblig.

[Kosi]

For the time, I'll reside with http://goatse.ru/

Re:It's a decision

[knarfling]

Should have looked closer. The June 2010 was only a preliminary decision. Took That long for the debate to make a final decision.

TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd really like to see ICANN create a TLD limited to banking sites and online stores the way .edu and .gov cannot be registered by any old scammer. I think that would do a lot in the way of preventing phishing. Few people understand the concept of security certificates and even fewer know why a self signed certificate is bad. ID theft and fraud seems to be a more important issue than preventing a 12 year old from seeing the human body due to a stigma based off 2000 year old mythology.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Dunbal]

than preventing a 12 year old from seeing the human body due to a stigma based off 2000 year old mythology.

People have been wearing clothes for far more than 2000 years, so I would say that the "stigma" runs a lot deeper than the Juedo-Christian reference. I often wonder exactly what it was that drove people to wear clothes - women's self consciousness about their breast size, men's self consciousness about their penis size, fear of mockery of either of the above from others, the obvious deterioration evidenced by aging (only people died rather young back then), women's periods, lack of ass wiping technology or what. It's an amusing mental exercise.

I don't think the weather had much to do with it since even natives from tribes that live in tropical climates wear SOME sort of clothing. Ours has just grown to cover more square centimeters.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Dunbal]

What do you mean? The people who run .gov is the biggest scammers of all!

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[spud603]

a stigma based off 2000 year old mythology

In all fairness, that kind of stigma is really only about 400 years old. Puritan discomfort with sex is something way more than what existed before it.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Dunbal]

Note to grammar nazis - yes I said "is" instead of "are", because I changed the sentence from singular to plural then hit submit, before remembering I forgot to change the verb. Also - fuck you.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[mwvdlee]

I often wonder exactly what it was that drove people to wear clothes

Run around naked through the woods and you'll quickly discover clothing is quite usefull.
I especially recommend thornbushes for maximum educational value.
Even if you don't want to put on shorts or a shirt, atleast get something to protect the dangling bits.

Seriously though, I think a lot of it is down to status; clothing demonstrates wealth hence people want clothing.
These days everybody has clothing, so we created artificial status through expensive clothing brands, and those seem to be quite popular as well.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[potHead42]

I often wonder exactly what it was that drove people to wear clothes

Did you ever notice that most mammals have fur?

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the weather had much to do with it since even natives from tribes that live in tropical climates wear SOME sort of clothing. Ours has just grown to cover more square centimeters.

You ever been stung by a plant or insect? You'd cover your balls up too. And even in warm climates it gets cold sometimes and until you discover penicillin, that can kill.

Anyway, you've killed an animal - what else are you going to do with the skin? The only reason for being naked is because you can't kill shit. Ironically, the exposed penis is a sign of impotence. These days we outsource the killing and make more of an effort in cleaning up the skins but the same principal remains in even the most refined societies.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

You're really just gunning for retributive off-topic modding from us grammar trolls with mod points, you know.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[blair1q]

That's actually a really good idea, until I stand up my fake TLD server and steal half the internet away from their usual .bank sites, around which they no longer do any sort of shoulder-checking when they enter security information.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

I often wonder exactly what it was that drove people to wear clothes

It's a sign that someone's not sexually available.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

he made the journey, stood inside of Uruk,
and declared to ... Gilgamesh:
            "There is a certain fellow who has come from the mountains--
            he is the mightiest in the land,
            his strength is as mighty as the meteorite(?) of Anu!
            He continually goes over the mountains,
            he continually jostles at the watering place with the animals,
            he continually plants his feet opposite the watering place.
            I was afraid, so I did not go up to him.
            He filled in the pits that I had dug,
            wrenched out my traps that I had spread,
            released from my grasp the wild animals.
            He does not let me make my rounds in the wilderness!"
Gilgamesh said to the trapper:
            "Go, trapper, bring the harlot, Shamhat, with you.
            When the animals are drinking at the watering place
            have her take off her robe and expose her sex.
            When he sees her he will draw near to her,
            and his animals, who grew up in his wilderness, will be alien to him."

...Enkidu knew nothing about eating bread for food,
and of drinking beer he had not been taught.
The harlot spoke to Enkidu, saying:
        "Eat the food, Enkidu, it is the way one lives.
        Drink the beer, as is the custom of the land."
Enkidu ate the food until he was sated,
he drank the beer-seven jugs!-- and became expansive and sang with joy!
He was elated and his face glowed.
He splashed his shaggy body with water,
and rubbed himself with oil, and turned into a human.

He put on some clothing and became like a warrior"

Epic of Gilgamesh c. somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BCE

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

"What do you mean? The people who run .gov is the biggest scammers of all!"

They are followed, in a close second place, by .edu!

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[merreborn]

I'd really like to see ICANN create a TLD limited to banking sites and online stores

Define "online store". The line between a "legitimate" online store and an illegitimate one is a thin one indeed. If the rules for certification are too strict, you hinder cottage industry (and their are thousands of tiny, one-man ecommerce sites out there). If the rules are too lax, scammers won't have any trouble registering domains.

And of course, many people still won't know the difference between http://legitimate.onlinestore/ and http://legitimate.onlinestore.mallicious.com/

And lastly, how do you know that the guy controlling the WiFi AP in the coffee shop you're sitting in hasn't hijacked all traffic to *.onlinestore? The only protection against that would be HTTPS. And if HTTPS works, then you don't need the special TLD in the first place.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

In many Pacific Islands all the women used to go topless - until the lousy Christians came and ruined it. Papua New Guinea managed to avoid the bastards, so their cultural dances still show titties.

Then there is the Umhlanga in some African countries.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[the_womble]

This is Slashdot, it is automatically assumed that anything can be blamed on Christianity, and the hive mind does not welcome rational discussion of the issue.

Nudity has a lot of implications:

1) Cod-pieces in the (very Christian) middle-ages in Europe, and similar penis casing in other cultures are probably some form of status display other societies suppress.
2) Monkey's display errect penises as a sign of aggression: http://pin.primate.wisc.edu/factsheets/entry/proboscis_monkey/behav
3) A visible erect penis may reveal information its owner wishes to conceal.
4) Periods, as you implied, need some clothing to deal with.
5) Breasts. Once you start concealing organs with sexual significance they are the next step.
6) Once you start wearing clothes for other reasons (e.g. protection in a cold or very hot climate) not wearing the usual level of clothing becomes sexually provocative.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

DNSSEC would prevent you from doing that.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not necessarily to keep a 12 year old from seeing the human body. It's to keep a 12 year old from seeing 4 midgets gangbang a woman while pissing in her mouth and defecating on her chest while a hairy dwarf eats ice cream out of her anus.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[30F06950]

.uk has TLD for incorporated companies (which in the UK are suchandsuch Ltd, or blahblah Plc - or their equivalents in at least welsh)

Those are .ltd.uk and .plc.uk. You get one domain that matches up with the registered name of your company.

Those domains basically don't get used. For one, they aren't widely known even to exist. For another the "high street" trading name of a company often doesn't match up with the name under which you're trading - (eg subway would get doctorsassociates.inc - *not* subway.inc)

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[h4rm0ny]

Ooh, somebody mod parent up +2 Sumarian.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

What's your excuse for the mistakes in the post you made excuses in?

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[LocalH]

It's to keep a 12 year old from seeing 4 midgets gangbang a woman while pissing in her mouth and defecating on her chest while a hairy dwarf eats ice cream out of her anus.

Um, I'm pretty sure that's not ice cream there dude...

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[JohnRoss1968]

The subway example is intentional. You ever see where they toot their own horn on how good their food is for you. They usually have something saying endorsed by doctors associates something or other. Its them endorsing their own stuff, but it looks like a bunch of doctors got together and said "yes this is good for you, eat it right now"

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[JohnRoss1968]

BTW I LOVE SUBWAY. the food taste great and is fairly healthy for you compared to McD's and others. I just think the whole doctors associates thing is a little underhanded and sneaky.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[JohnRoss1968]

Not enough info. Please list sites where you saw that.
For educational reasons of course.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[JohnRoss1968]

or that there is 3 feet of snow outside of the cave.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[30F06950]

ok then another one:

JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA doing business as Chase

chase.com? jpmorganchasebank.na.us
?

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm gonna have invoke rule34 on this one, link or it didn't happen.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Optic7]

I disagree. I think it probably had much more to do with protection from the cold. You see the tribes from cold climates have a tradition of wearing clothes, while the tribes from tropical climates don't. I would guess that the forests are just as thick if not thicker in the Amazon region than in Europe for example, and you still see tribes today in the Amazon that run around completely naked, except for decorations.

Re:TLD for Financial Transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

armor ???

The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[TheRedDuke]

And for one simple reason: if every porn site on the planet has the same domain, every ISP/college/corporation/consumer router who doesn't want their clients/students/employees/family members viewing this material will just block it. Heck, as soon as I get to work on Monday, I'm going to update our firewall and IPS settings. No sane operation trying to make money on pornography is going to touch this domain with a 10ft [stripper] pole.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[Anonymous Coward]

So, basically you are saying that a whole bunch of new comers to internet porn will be starting up new sites but few if any will be current players in the porn industry...

Hot dam this is going to be frickin awesome!

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[painandgreed]

You're funny. One, most people who are browsing porn will not stand for a service that cuts out what they want to do and businesses will be happy to sell them service. In the end, teenagers and people at work, neither of which are paying for the service, would be the ones blocked. Two, sane operations will scoop up all the good name space they can. Domain names are cheap and something like sex.xxx will be worth millions no matter how many people try and block it. Not to mention that it doesn't have to be the only domain name pointing to their porn filled servers. They'll have their .xxx domain and their .com domain which will all go to the web server through whatever methods keeps it from being blacklisted if one or the other happens to be on a black list.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[mwvdlee]

They'll touch the domain.
They'll just keep their .com/.net/.org/.whatever domains too.

In the worst scenario, the .xxx TLD could be a gateway to excessive government censorship.
In the best scenario, ICANN just makes a lot of money by selling .xxx domains and nothing changes for the rest of the world.
I can't imagine any scenario in which this .xxx TLD would have beneficial effects.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[msauve]

every ISP/college/corporation/consumer router who doesn't want their clients/students/employees/family members viewing this material will just block it

pron hosts file for sale!

x.x.x.x site1.xxx
y.y.y.y site2.xxx

Yea, those blocks will work well (do you really think they'll do rDNS?).

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[blair1q]

wait. you think a router gives a damn about the name of a site?

doesn't do you any good to resolve a name to an IP address if packets containing the IP address get spilled on onan's floor

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[TheRedDuke]

You're funny.

I know - it's not often I can work a stripper joke into a /. post. I'll be here all week!

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't doubt they'll embrace it. When I'm looking for porn (gasp!) seeing a .xxx domain makes me think I'm more likely to find what I'm after.

It's no different than searching for educational resources tutorials, notes, or published papers and seeing ".edu", or looking for a product sold in my country and mentally prioritizing .co.uk over .com.

I don't expect porn purveyors to drop their .com sites, but I can see them adding .xxx.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[LordLucless]

I can understand colleges and corporations, but why the hell would ISPs block this? I'm sure pornography accounts for a large amount of the bandwidth they sell their customers. Doing this would be shooting themselves in the foot.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[Sabalon]

The best will be when it becomes a hosting situation wherein some site that hosts evilsex.xxx also hosts academicresearch.com on the same IP.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[h4rm0ny]

At first glance, one would guess the ISPs would like being able to charge a little extra for inclusion of the .XXX package. But in practice, I think it would not happen because there are a lot of people who are in situations, e.g. married, where they would be nervous of explicitly paying for the extra service. Thus they will surreptitiously go for providers where no such distinction is made.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[msauve]

You don't know how blocking based on a DNS name works, do you? It is done by firewalls, not routers. The only way to know what IP addresses to block is to do an rDNS on it, or have a frequently updated list. One could also do L4-7 inspection, but that too is easily defeated.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[Anonymous Coward]

Great!

Then I will host a torrent tracker behind a xxx -domain, and nobody who shouldn't will get it, because "lowut, you want access to a xxx-domain?" ...

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[jmorris42]

Here is a hint. The cable company doesn't give you porno tv by default, why? Because a) they can upsell on it and b) fundies wouldn't subscribe if porn was basic cable. Explain why both of those arguments won't apply when the same cable company sells Internet. Longstanding tradition will make upselling access to porn hard for awhile but a few fundie groups will make the quite reasonable argument that since a blocked by default on .xxx doesn't involve the company paying huge fees for a filtering solution that it should be ON by default and it will happen. And then turning it off will quickly become a fee bearing service change.

Should have put all this energy into arguing for a .kids domain. More legit benefits if the goal is keeping kids out of the filth and less downside to everyone else.

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[Anonymous Coward]

The porn industry isn't going for it. They hate the idea.

They'll have their .xxx domain and their .com domain which will all go to the web server through whatever methods keeps it from being blacklisted

Most of the porn industry will immediately register the xxx version of their .com, even though they're actually against the tld, for all the reasons stated here. Why? So no one else will take it.

And then the blocking-technology vendors will simply start blocking on all TLDs, if the left side matches anything in .xxx. So the pornsters will need to buy yet another .com.

And if they end up simply using dashes to fool the blocks, the vendors will start ignoring dashes. And then many non-porn domains will find themselves blocked.

The only good news here is all the money I can make setting up a proxy server :).

Re:The Porn Industry Won't Go For It

[LordLucless]

Yeah, the cable TV company also doesn't sell you bandwidth. I know a lot of US companies provide ostensibly "unlimited" plans, but the rest of the world tends to have ISPs that charge you on the basis of how much bandwidth you consume. Even the US is shifting that way, from what I read on slashdot.

If suddenly its users can't browse porn, the ISP loses money (its selling less GB). Cable TV and ISPs have different setups. I think the problem, rather than worrying about a theoretical "slippery slope", is better addressed by ensuring that internet access is unfiltered. I mean, the situation you describe can be done with or without a .xxx domain - and is. I know plenty of ISPs that offer free, kid-safe filtering opt-in on their connections (although it's a best-effort, not a guarantee, obviously).

Next up: Goatse.xxx

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know it's coming.

Next americans declares sex as criminal

[Anonymous Coward]

Next americans declares sex as criminal - And hopefully under breed to extinction.

ICANN Approves .XXX

[MrKevvy]

I can approves it too, LoLCat. Your point?

Re:ICANN Approves .XXX

[Anonymous Coward]

ICANN haz cheeseburger

Enforcement?

[Monoman]

They don't enforce the intended purposes of most of the other domains so what is the point besides another way to generate money?

Re:Enforcement?

[flimflammer]

There is none. This lets icann sell more domains.

ICANN has XXX?

[LSD-OBS]

ICAME

Re:ICANN has XXX?

[Anonymous Coward]

ISAW

Re:ICANN has XXX?

[souravzzz]

ILOLD

Wait I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

What does the number 30 in Roman numerals have to do with porn?

Re:Wait I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Average age of porn actors.

www.anonymouscoward.xxx

[Anonymous Coward]

Woot! I get my own porno domain name!

everyfamouspersoneverknown.xxx

[russ1337]

Wait till someone registers $firstname$lastname.xxx .... of their least favorite politician. When they come along and say "hey you're domain squatting my name" you can make sure there is heaps of publicity about them wanting to register their .xxx domain.

this will have absolutely no unintended consequences and certainly wont be abused [/sarcasm]

Re:everyfamouspersoneverknown.xxx

[Anonymous Coward]

that gives me an idea. i'm going to apply for a TLD of either ".rule34" or ".r34"
- wherein you enter in the url .rule34 you get porn of
- wherein you enter in the url .rule34 the domain is bound to you and you get full content control
- wherein owning .rule34, if you don't upload porn of within a month you'll be permanently banned from rule34 TLD access

@see xkcd

Re:everyfamouspersoneverknown.xxx

[shoemilk]

Dude, I already registered yourmom.xxx

Re:everyfamouspersoneverknown.xxx

[Anonymous Coward]

Just sue for slander since it is obviously what that registration is intended for. No real mud thrown at the politician and s/hes now the victim.

Re:It's a decision

[Anonymous Coward]

Should have looked closer. The June 2010 was only a preliminary decision. Took That long for the debate to make a final decision.

It took that long to investigate the proposed use.

Because ICANN.

[Anonymous Coward]

Enough said.

.XXX and ipv6

[Anonymous Coward]

May be the .XXX industry will lead the world by example and switch over from IPV4 to IPV6? That will free up some IPV4 addresses so it will last us for another few years!!!

Can't resist...

[davevr]

I guess ICAAN is helping put the STD in the sTLD!


/ducks

Re:Can't resist...

[blair1q]

And the fq in fqdn!

Re:Can't resist...

[witherstaff]

Years ago I ran a dating site. The forums soon had a thread going about which member hookups caused STDs. It's times like that when a web developer really knows they've had an impact on their user's lives. I can say that I have experience in social media with a lot of user stickiness.

Re:Can't resist...

[JohnRoss1968]

"I can say that I have experience in social media with a lot of user stickiness."
Maybe you should be experiencing things with different users. Maybe ones who shower?

about damn time

[Anonymous Coward]

While I don't have the cash to register a site in this domain, I certainly wouldn't hesitate if I did.

I certainly won't be blocking it my firewall, but organizations who have policies against what can be expected on most of the sites in this TLD will be able to block it with ease, and the registrants know and understand that

I even expect GoogleTranslate to be modified to keep their filters consistent vis-a-vis using GoogleTranslate as an open proxy into this domain.

I don't expect to spend much time there, but I certainly want to make that decision myself.

Let The Fight Begin

[Anonymous Coward]

... for sex.xxx ... because it went so well in the .com realm

I guess you could say...

[chemicaldave]

...it's coming.

Re:I guess you could say...

[Anonymous Coward]

They've been sweating over this for a while... thought about it long and hard... and ended up going soft and opening up to the pressure...

Re:I guess you could say...

[jamesjw]

.....*puts on sun glasses* "Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaahhhhh!!!!!!" :)

Re:I guess you could say...

[kypper]

YEEAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!

Re:I guess you could say...

[Akral]

The better questions is "Who can say they saw this coming?"

Where can I get one.

[Anonymous Coward]

I want one of these for my personal (non-porn) website. When and how can I get myname.xxx ?

tl;dr -- money talks

[spydum]

tl;dr: ICANN grew up, and recognized just because they don't have unanimous support on a TLD being suitable, doesn't me they should block it. Oh, and the fees collected for the domains are better than a sharp stick in the eye.

Next up .nc-17

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't wait until they create TLD nc-17 to give the adult websites with artist merit a chance to be seen and not filtered. It worked so well for movies I'm sure it will work here too!

Re:Next up .nc-17

[Anonymous Coward]

What's "artist merit" about non-consensual stories involving 17-year olds?

Let's face it ...

[Tjp($)pjT]

This is a bad decision.This is the wrong direction. Approve .kids as a TLD. .xxx only creates a percieved value that the rest of the Internet is safe. But local regulations and laws vary so much it will never be able to be enforced. And on top of that you have created a gold mine where the registrar of .xxx can charge whatever the want, domains will have conflicts registering in the one .xxx tld where in the rest of the Internet they have the same mark for different organizations in .net and .com, etc.

By having a .kids domain the registrar can be held liable for policing the registrations they allow. And you simply limit the kids to .kids TLD. That does force major sites to have a kid safe version of representative content. Of course, again, laws vary worldwide on whats acceptable.

The most responsible action would be for parents to take control and responsibility for their kids actions on the Internet. It is not too tough. And it is their role to guide their child's development.

To pass this to government is akin to "It takes a village to raise an idiot."

< Ad hominium debate attack="follows" >
Perhaps it can be attributed to the ICANN not understanding sex as a business, or, well, sex at all ...
< / Ad Hominum debate >

Re:Let's face it ...

[cheekyjohnson]

And you simply limit the kids to .kids TLD.

A better idea would be to just not care. Why even bother with the censorship?

Re:Let's face it ...

[UBfusion]

Unfortunately, nobody can enforce and continually audit that a .kids site won't ever post inappropriate content. The .kids registrar is only able to check that a client has e.g. a clean criminal record and such. This fact alone can't possibly guarantee that a random web forum user under said domain someone won't eventually post a nasty picture or provide instructions for a happy and successful school bombing attack. Unless everything is moderated, which won't happen because it costs an awful lot of money.

"Winter"

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the correct answer to "I often wonder exactly what it was that drove people to wear clothes". Seriously. this isn't rocket science.

Re:"Winter"

[Dunbal]

I guess you're entitled to read however you want - but I did address winter in my post. But that was near the bottom and I guess your attention span had expired long before then.

open it up

[sixsixtysix]

I think they should completely open it up so anyone can register any tld they like.

Porn sites servlets

[Anonymous Coward]

Great! Now I can write porn site servlets.

Wow! Never thought I'd see the day!

[KlomDark]

The .xxx domain saga has been going longer than Duke Nukem Forever's release date. What a year this is, to see both .xxx come to fruition and an actual release date for DNF - both in the same year even!

Suppose next we'll get a black president or something. [Imagine Doc Brown if Marty would've been from now instead of 1985. Think having an actor for a president was strange...]

Sorry, you don't have that "right".

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Violation of free speech? what about my rights to have a clean search and not have to worry about my children seeing things that I don't want them to see.

Sorry. You don't have that "right". The rights to free speech and a free press take precedence.

Free speech and press were recognized because interfering with them interferes with peaceful removal of tyrannical regimes, leading to more tyranny on one hand and more violence when they finally do get replaced on the other. Give tyrants ANY excuse to suppress speech or press and they'll use it to hobble their political opposition.

Further: The internet, like printing, was created by adults for adults. You don't let your toddlers wander alone in the part of town that includes porn shops and bars. Why should the internet be any different? Minding your kids is YOUR responsibility. Trying to kid-proof the whole world is not an acceptable substitute. Do it yourself, hire it done, or teach your kids (once they can handle it) how to handle the "bad stuff" responsibly rather than trying to shield them from it.

The .xxx domain provides the equivalent of zoning, establishing an "area of town" where the porn stores can set up voluntarily. Seems to me that's a move in the right direction.

Supply/demand, will they auction sites?

[CrazyJim1]

I don't care that they're porn. I'm more interested in seeing that they're in demand. Instead of selling domains to the first person that comes along, will they do something like an auction on them?

Re:Stupid morons

[grilled-cheese]

You also forgot that legitimate businesses will be buying up the .xxx domains as fast as possible to prevent others tarnishing their name (Google.xxx, Yahoo.xxx, Bing.xxx, Oracle.xxx, etc.). If establishing a serious presence on the internet, I suspect that some companies buy all the TLD they can get for a domain for future proofing too.

Just think - no kids

[seifried]

There's a restaurant local to me - http://www.dadeo.ca/ the best part is "Dadeo Diner & Bar" ... "& Bar". No-one under 18 is allowed. So you got great food and no kids. Zero, zilch, nada. The same will hopefully be true for .xxx, imagine an entire set of websites with no kids.....

I think .xxx might work out quite well.

Re:Just think - no kids

[jack2000]

Kids already aren't all over porn sites...

pleas of prudence

[epine]

But, your honour, I was surfing barelylegal.com not barelylegal.xxx .

Surely someone will succeed with such a flea bargain.

P.S. It's amazing how much markup is conveyed by tone of voice.

Re:pleas of prudence

[Anonymous Coward]

With one of it being a blog about law, of course.

Not so fast...

[UBfusion]

I was tempted to mod you up, but "free speech" and "free read" are not the same thing. In this case "free speech" would be to be allowed to post one's nude or xxx pictures, which to my knowledge is still not illegal (except in Facebook and other sterilized environments).

Too Late

[danbuter]

Porn sites are already established. They are not going to move unless they are new, can grab a better name if they're quick, or they are forced to move by law.

Just one more income opportunity

[toriver]

Registrars do anything for money. There's plenty of porn sites under .info, .biz, .name - domains that in theory had strict rules for what they could be used for. Adding more TLDs only serve to increase the space the registrars can register you under.

And people find what they are looking for by using a search engine anyway, not by guessing at the correct URL for something.

AT&T More Options to screw you right.

[JohnRoss1968]

AT&T: Yes, How can I help you.
Customer: For some reason I cant get to my favorite adult sites anymore.
AT&T: Ok sir I will be more than happy to assist you. First I will need your name, and address please.
Customer: umm, this information is kept confidential right?
AT&T: Sir I need you name and address information to look up your account.
Customer: Umm, OK here it is. John Publick I live at 1248 Main street in Somewhere New York.
AT&T: One moment while I bring up that account please..............
AT&T Ok sir I have that account information up. Could you verify the phone number on the account please.
Customer: Sure its 1-555-1212.
AT&T: Thank You. And You would like to Opt in to being able to look at filthy disgusting porn in the privacy of your own dank, dark basement?
Customer: Excuse me???
AT&T: Did you want to opt in to being able to view adult material?
Customer: Yes, yes I do that is why I called?
AT&T: To opt into accepting the .xxx domain you will be charged a 1 time fee of $5.00
Customer: What? That's stupid. Well it is only 5 dollars. OK I guess.
AT&T: OK we have you set up to be able to view .xxx domains for a 1 time fee of $5 per month.
Customer: What? You said it was a one time fee!
AT&T: It is a 1 time fee sir. 1 Time per month.
Customer: That's outrageous. Damn it ok fine you raised my rates by $5 per month.
AT&T: Would you also like to download from these sites sir?
Customer: Of course I want to download from the sites , that's why I'm going to them.
AT&T: AT&T has set up a new service you might want to get then. Right now when you download from a .XXX domain it counts as triple the download. So if you were to download a 1 gig file it would count towards your cap as 3 gigs, but if you sign up for the Adult plan it will only count as double. And its only $5.00 per month.
Customer: You want to charge me another $5 a month????
AT&T: I am just reading the available offers to you sir, you do not have to accept them.
Customer: OK OK FINE DAMN IT.
AT&T: Would you also like to opt out of AT&T selling this information to our third party partners?
Customer: Huh? What third party partners?
AT&T: In your area our 3rd party partners are. The Local PTA, Mothers Against Porn, The Local Police Department, The local school system, The Local Churches against Immorality, your wife and your boss. Also opting out will stop any fliers from being sent to your home describing exactly what kind of porn you are watching and how often you watch it.
Customer: What, NO, You cant do that. You would ruin my reputation and my marriage. What kind of sick bastards are you? Cancel the whole damn thing, as a matter of fact cancel my AT&T account.
AT&T: I am sorry sir your order has already gone through. Would You like to opt out of the Third party information network? its only $50 per month, however AT&T withholds the right to change the terms of service and or prices at any time.
Customer:Ok fine Ill do this for 1 month then cancel and you wont see me again ever, bastards.
AT&T: I'm sorry sir those prices are with a 6 month agreement.
Customer: Fine I will quit after 6 months then, you blackmailing %$*#$'s
AT&T: We also have a program where AT&T wont send 6 well hung ex-porn stars to your house to gang rape you. Would you like to opt out of that sir??

Only paysites?

[KarlIsNotMyName]

There are basically two kinds of porn on the net. Free and FREE. The first kind might be ad-supported, but often it's just part of a site with more types of content. I don't see those sites having interest in an xxx domain.

Hey, ICANN! That's great, but..

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed a couple...

Do black people make you feel uncomfortable? Shazam! Vote .coon for a whites-only Internet!

Scared of insects? Why not make your life easier with .bees?

Sick of tiresome Internet memes? Vote .lol and kick 4chan where it hurts!

Seriously, guys.. give it a fucking rest. You can not and will not win. Give up.

It's gonna cost ya

[Anonymous Coward]

Countdown to ISPs charging $20 a month extra for access to the .XXX tld. The days of free porn on the internet are numbered.

Only US porn?

[0-9a-f]

US porn is not Australian porn, and is definitely not Italian or Dutch porn (just to pick two). Obviously, any US legislation requiring use of .xxx would only apply to US porn, and thus international porn would still be available to people operating from the USA.

I see no problem, except that maybe the US porn industry might find it easier to move offshore.

And how will they be distributed?

[Anonymous Coward]

So are we going to have 10 million people trying to register sex.xxx within the first minute that these domains are available or are they all just going to be handed to this "ICM Registry" company?

Followed by

[Anonymous Coward]

CSI Miami opening credits

what is the point of TLDs?

[mcrepairman]

Can someone knowledgeable explain me what is the point of maintaining hierarchies in domain names? Why.Cant.I.use.any.name for an IP address? or to be more exact: why can I only do so via a search engine?

Finally!

[hesaigo999ca]

About time, they hopefully will force transfer of all adult content to these domains and ban use of regular domains for adult content....
and then blocking all the adult content would be a sinch for all involved, including the parents of said kids...