Skip to comments.
Will the Department of Commerce OK a XXX Internet Domain?
Human Events Online ^
| June 15, 2005
| Jan LaRue
Posted on 06/15/2005 9:43:12 AM PDT by hinterlander
Unless the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) withholds its approval, the porn industry will have its own domain on the World Wide Web, .xxx. Proponents of the domain say that Web sites such as Hardcore porn.xxx, Rape Porn.xxx, or XXXporn.xxx will make it easier for parents and software filtering companies to protect kids from adult material. As if Hardcore porn.com, Rape Porn.com, or XXX porn.com, leave them clueless.
If approved, the porn industry and its allies will be free to self-regulate and operate the domain, which would be entirely voluntary. Internet porn site operators would be free to participate on the .xxx domain and be free to remain on any other Internet domain on which they are registered. Double their pleasure and double their fun while expanding their reach and making it easier for kids to find their porn.
The controversy over the .xxx domain comes in the midst of an announcement today by the Florida Family Association (FFA): Two of the largest Internet porn companies in the world operate with alleged addresses in Miami and Orlando, Florida. FFAs programmed special software, dubbed PornCrawler, searched the World Wide Web, identified porn sites and summarized which companies operate those sites. PornCrawler analyzed 297 million links and found that 20 companies in the United States account for over 70 percent of the pornography posted on the World Wide Web.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: commerce; culture; government; porn; pornography; xxx
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
To: hinterlander
Unless companies are forced to use this domain, it's useless for filtering. (Such force would probably violate a lot of rights or something).
2
posted on
06/15/2005 9:44:36 AM PDT
by
kharaku
(G3)
To: hinterlander
why does the DOC need to approve? I thought the internet was regulated by non profit private groups and completley out of teh hands of government?
3
posted on
06/15/2005 9:47:53 AM PDT
by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/canadahealthcare.htm)
To: kharaku
I think a .xxx domain is a great idea. You'd have new bidding wars on domains to go with it and an entirely new gold rush on the web. It gives one more control to distinguishing the web like .biz, .gov, .mil, .tv (I know, it's a country.) etc. Calling everything a .com or .net seems very limiting and doesn't really distinguish categories as well as the other domains may.
To: hinterlander
I'm okay with this. In fact I've been suggesting it for years. But the trick is that you need some kind of regulation to back it up so that a porn site which is not "xxx" immediately loses its site name. It sure would make filtering a whole lot easier. Think of as online zoning.
5
posted on
06/15/2005 9:52:37 AM PDT
by
PMCarey
To: PittsburghAfterDark
It gives one more control to distinguishing the web like .biz, .gov, .mil, .tv (I know, it's a country.) etc.
That's what I think. I'm sure some software company will soon produce software that blocks a browser from accessing the ".xxx" domain.
To: kharaku
Unless companies are forced to use this domain, it's useless for filtering. I agree, but I'm not sure that it couldn't be forced. We pass regulations on businesses all the time, including the porn industry. Why not force them to have the .xxx domain?
To: hispanichoosier
All you would need is for the an option in the browser setup to block xxx domains. This would be an easy fix and could also be password protected.
8
posted on
06/15/2005 9:55:35 AM PDT
by
unixfox
(AMERICA - 20 Million ILLEGALS Can't Be Wrong!)
To: hinterlander
Leave the marketplace alone. The government has not basis to inject itself into this situation.
9
posted on
06/15/2005 9:55:55 AM PDT
by
montag813
To: hinterlander
Screw Big Stupid Government. Do it. I thought it was an obvious great idea 10 years ago.
10
posted on
06/15/2005 9:56:01 AM PDT
by
Hank Rearden
(Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
To: hinterlander
Me, I've always thought there should be and "adult" tag in the metadata. I'm guessing pornographers would use it voluntarily -- why waste bandwidth on kids without credit cards? These guys are in business.
11
posted on
06/15/2005 9:56:21 AM PDT
by
prion
(Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM the spelling police)
To: traviskicks
why does the DOC need to approve?You need InterNIC to come aboard and provide it some kind of policying power so that porn sites which are not *.xxx lose their domain names.
12
posted on
06/15/2005 9:56:58 AM PDT
by
PMCarey
To: PittsburghAfterDark
I agree, it's a great idea. I don't feel the gov't should have any regulation on the 'net and if legitimate 'adult' sites (as opposed to the illegal crud) follow along with this willingly, it could only be a benefit to everyone.
13
posted on
06/15/2005 9:57:16 AM PDT
by
softwarecreator
(Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires)
To: hinterlander
I don't think the DOC has any say on this, ICANN already voted and approved the .xxx. It is voluntary and meaningless. Just as I can get TheOtherOne.org or whatever. All the porn sites will not stop using .com, they will add a .xxx to their listing. This is much ado about nothing...oh, except the $60 per .xxx domain name sold!
14
posted on
06/15/2005 9:57:27 AM PDT
by
TheOtherOne
(I often sacrifice my spelling on the alter of speed.)
To: hinterlander
If they dont use the .xxx domain, and use .com instead, we can then say they are pushing this stuff on the rest of us who don't desire this, thus perhaps lead on to maybe some legal charges? No one is saying they can't publish, just where they can.
To: montag813
Leave the marketplace alone. The government has not basis to inject itself into this situation.Think of this as a zoning issue - or are you opposed to zoning?
16
posted on
06/15/2005 9:58:13 AM PDT
by
PMCarey
To: prion
Exactly. Why have kids, or people not interested, wasting bandwidth ... this way, if you go there, it's not by accident and they would have a better chance at selling their site or products.
17
posted on
06/15/2005 10:00:21 AM PDT
by
softwarecreator
(Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires)
To: Bluegrass Conservative
It isn't as much a regulation problem as much as a definitional problem. How do you define "porn" or whatever material requires the xxx designation? I've stumbled across sites that have an adult content warning, which I don't know if it is required for their content or not. Perhaps if it is, there's your answer -- anything with an adult content warning = XXX. I think what some people might not like is sites that might have nude pictures (i.e. photo sites or nudist sites) being required to be a XXX.
18
posted on
06/15/2005 10:00:58 AM PDT
by
1L
To: kharaku
Unless companies are forced to use this domain, it's useless for filtering.
No force is necessary. There's a neat trick in the geek world called DNS (domain name services). Every time you connect to the Internet, your computer is provided two Name Servers that are used to convert domain names like www.freerepublic.com into numbers the machine can understand like 209.157.64.201. Try it out, click this
http://209.157.64.201/. These Name Servers are provided by your ISP. It is a completely distributed system. Now if your ISP is provided a list of porn sites and their .xxx counterparts, and the ISP
voluntarily serves one but not the other ... voila ... the companies are forced to use the .xxx domain without truly being governmentally "forced". The people govern themselves; if your ISP won't enforce the .xxx standards, pick a new ISP and stop funding the old one. Eventually, they will come around. I support this 100%.
19
posted on
06/15/2005 10:02:49 AM PDT
by
so_real
("The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
To: 1L
How do you define "porn" or whatever material requires the xxx designation? I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it. :-)
Seriously though, it would be no different than how it is defined for movies, magazines, etc. Obviously that has to be some definition for those.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson