Proposal for Porn Domain Revived

Thanks to Brettuk for posting this in BPN.

A net domain for pornography was originally considered in 2001. A proposal was made in June 2005, a final approval was expected in December 2005 but was delayed to May 2006 and was quickly rejected. Over the years, conservative groups, politicians and pornographers have actively criticized the .xxx domain idea. Operators do not like the idea of easily masse blocking of porn sites.

ICM registry, the backer of .xxx, has made sure that site.xxx will not hit a user with spam or spyware and will use a system to label their content. ICM has also taken steps to ensure child pornography or anything of the like is not available or promoted. ICM promises to actively police all .xxx sites. Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) has invited the public to comment on the revised .xxx agreement with the final cutoff date being February 5, 2007. If final approval is won it is not yet clear when the domain could start operating.

News source: BBC News

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

HP Offers Touch-Screen Vista on New PCs

Next Story

Hellgate: London - Multiplayer To Have Monthly Fee

38 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Let's hope this crap fails again! The reason was already mentioned:

Operators do not like the idea of easily masse blocking of porn sites.

It would just play into the hands of puritan lunatics :mad:

This is a fantastic idea. But, as Markjensen pointed out, who has the authority to determine what would belong under the XXX domain and my question is how would it be enforced?

Lets assume they all move to .xxx what about others means to get porn. www isn't the only (or even best) way to get porn online. If someone wants porn even on a filtered system they WILL get it. Having said that I can see where this MIGHT help eliminate accidental porn. But I doubt that as it's what porn pushers want.

This domain plan isn't intended on eliminating access to porn. Just to try to control where it is. Instead of scattered in every .com, .net, .us, .tk TLD, it would be placed under .xxx. Sort of a "red light district" of the web. Makes it easier (in theory only) to filter porn out of family or public computers. (in practice and implementation, there are some very serious flaws)

This is for casual home or public terminals browsing the web. Not for newsgroups, bittorrent, etc.

Yes, but with websites having links to bittorrent and browsers starting to have support for it built right in it will make little difference even to the 'casual home or public terminal' users over time.. probably by the time all the porn gets moved to .xxx domain bittorrent support will be common in browsers. And there are websites that have newsgroups browsing right on their site now too. So .xxx will be worthless.. and serve only to make porn even easier to find as has been mentioned already.

Bad idea. This will stop me from oggling at porn when i'm at University if they use xxx filters. This will make me stressed and therefore counter-productive and ultimately fail my degree. Nooooooooooooo.

I just got an email from the Christian hate group AFA condemning this action. They said that it'll encourage more porn. That is as false as saying that proper sex education encourages children to have sex.

Foub said,
I just got an email from the Christian hate group AFA condemning this action. They said that it'll encourage more porn. That is as false as saying that proper sex education encourages children to have sex.

I myself am a Catholic and disagree with 90% of the views of the catholic church (Catholicism is a sect of christianity), they have very extreme views and are blind to their own naivety.

All we need to do is get rid of porn,warez,mp3s. Then the internet would be fast and safe some what lol. Hell I would pay $5 to $10 if I did not haft to see all the bs that comes up just surfing ads ads and more ads with girls it get annoying. Even if you have ad blocker.

This is a dumb idea. Pornographers will still use the .com extension. I don't see what problem .xxx solves other than making it easier to find porn.

MaceX said,
I don't see what problem .xxx solves other than making it easier to find porn.

Exactly! The fact that .xxx makes porn easier to find means that more suppliers will use .xxx domains to make more cash, legally.

Could possibly end up with something like this: "Christian groups and whoever put pressure on publicly owned ISPs to totally block off .xxx or demand users "opt in." I.e. "do this or we we'll dump your stock and it'll fall through the floor". ISPs will comply, alot of users will be too embarrassed to "opt in", more revenue loss."

You get a supply of kleenex and lotion, as well as a "toy" if you've been productive.

..man, Kleenex is gonna make so much money.. THAT or have all the "fluids" go to the -ahem- special bank for those that want to be called "donors".

One could make the argument that porn would be easier to find though still, since most people don't even know how a freakin filter works.

Just type in www.(insert word here).xxx and you've got yourself a billion porn sites for easy access.


That and those silly Christian conservatives want to hide in the closet and not acknowledge the existence of porn in the first place. :suspicious:

Well, you can assume all you want. Since I'm a conservative, and a Christian... I must not want this??? You're wrong. I think this is a GREAT idea. It would allow parents and schools (and other places of the sort) to block naked yum yums from youngsters.

From now on.. try not to assume.. because I could assume that YOU (being a liberal) are a commie tree hugging bisexual. I wouldn't do such a thing. Ya know? :-)

Now all we need to do is to kick all the porn off the .com, .net and .org domains. Then all the schools would need to do would b to filter .xxx

If someone ever invents a time machine...

this is a good idea, it just means a MASSIVE court and ebay auction battle will take place over the best .xxx names.

they need to think of a system to convert the .com's to .xxx. if they allow anyone to register any name, expect every good name to be taken by one jerk with too much money, posting the addresses on ebay.

This is an excellent idea if it's DONE as it's planned. Chances are it won't be, and the ease of actively policing the millions of porn sites that go with this program is a harrowing job.

It does seem like a good idea.

The problem I have is who determines what content gets ".xxx"? What laws get used to enforce this when the servers can be hosted in any country?

Some examples of "porn" for .xxx would be obvious. How about artistic photo sessions that happen to have some nude content? Soft-core porn? Overly provocative swimwear or underwear? (I have a link that I probably can't post to a current Aussie provider with some partially see-through swimwear). Perhaps pictures on family websites of new baby's birth or first bath?

The biggest problem with .xxx is that there is no cut-and-dried definition of "porn" and "not porn". Add in the lack of global enforcability/laws...

This is pointless.

What so the website owner / domain registrar doesn't have the choice in the matter of whether their site gets the .xxx domain, if so then the decision is just dumb.... Otherwise it's a great idea.... The only problem I see, is that it would be harder for people to look at porn 'secretly', but really their is no need to, it's a perfectly normal thing nowadays... (and healthy).

Again, what is "porn"? There is a "wicked" site, selling "weasel" swimwear. Provocative, for sure. Pornographic? Who determines. Or an artist whose work occasionally depicts a nude?

Or, from the domain end, someone registers a .tk or such country domain. They place nude images on it. What laws can force that sovereign nation to remove that site?

I see politicians clapping themselves on the back for "cleaning up the internet", but nothing really changing.

markjensen said,
Again, what is "porn"? There is a "wicked" site, selling "weasel" swimwear. Provocative, for sure. Pornographic? Who determines. Or an artist whose work occasionally depicts a nude?

Or, from the domain end, someone registers a .tk or such country domain. They place nude images on it. What laws can force that sovereign nation to remove that site?

I see politicians clapping themselves on the back for "cleaning up the internet", but nothing really changing.

Well there's a big difference between art, clothing and porn.

They are solving something, they're making sure that websites with pornographic content all have one domain extension, meaning it'll be easy to block such websites.

Pornography is very different to nude art, nude art is purely artistic and is meant for visual reasons, not sexual reasons, whereas pornograpy is simply provided to stimulate people sexually.

Clothing like bikinis, thongs etc. won't be underneath the .xxx because it's clothing, even if it is meant for sexual purposes (ann summers etc.) but the more severe fetish clothing will probably be on a specialised .xxx domain.

Your argument is pointless.

traxor said,
Well there's a big difference between art, clothing and porn.

They are solving something, they're making sure that websites with pornographic content all have one domain extension, meaning it'll be easy to block such websites.

Pornography is very different to nude art, nude art is purely artistic and is meant for visual reasons, not sexual reasons, whereas pornograpy is simply provided to stimulate people sexually.

Clothing like bikinis, thongs etc. won't be underneath the .xxx because it's clothing, even if it is meant for sexual purposes (ann summers etc.) but the more severe fetish clothing will probably be on a specialised .xxx domain.

Your argument is pointless.

Wrong. My argument is not only relevant, but crucial to the matter.

Your distinction between "nude art" and "pornography" is yours. Not mine. Not the U.S. Government's, nor the Saudi's or French.

Then, under what laws are they going to force changes? A "porn" site that is hosted and the Botswana .bw domain will be controlled in what way?

Again, I reiterate: nice idea. Impractical to implement.

markjensen said,
Wrong. My argument is not only relevant, but crucial to the matter.

Your distinction between "nude art" and "pornography" is yours. Not mine. Not the U.S. Government's, nor the Saudi's or French.

Then, under what laws are they going to force changes? A "porn" site that is hosted and the Botswana .bw domain will be controlled in what way?

Again, I reiterate: nice idea. Impractical to implement.

Well chances are that the suppliers for domains will have to implement their own guidelines towards pornographic content, meaning that people who set up a domain will have to agree to not host pornographic content on it unless it's a .xxx domain, and if the site gets found out it'd be taken down.

It'll be difficult to implement yes, but not impossible or impractical to do so, it'll be worth it in the end.

traxor said,
...and if the site gets found out it'd be taken down.
Nice.

Now, who will take it down? What authority does any outside organization have in taking down that hypothetical Botswana site I mentioned in the previous post.

You post descriptions of what will happen, without thought on the process and ownerships involved. A Utopian look, at best.

markjensen said,
Nice.

Now, who will take it down? What authority does any outside organization have in taking down that hypothetical Botswana site I mentioned in the previous post.

You post descriptions of what will happen, without thought on the process and ownerships involved. A Utopian look, at best.


As stated in my post, the people who buy the domain name would have to sign an agreement allowed the people to take down the site.

I don't know how it'll be done, and neither do you... but by the looks of things it will be done, somehow.

Hmm. I'm not sure why you're so uppity. The use of the .xxx domain would be completely voluntary. As quoted from the full article

Critics have also noted that use of the .xxx domain is entirely voluntary and some suspect that few sites would sign up to use the suffix.

So, all of your points are moot. Those operating porn site will not be required to use a .xxx domain, the only policing going on would be that stated in the article. Sites utilizing .xxx would be checked to make sure they're not spamming, distributing spyware or hosting child pornography. No policing involving what is or isn't pornography is taking place. I doubt they're going to look at their applicant's websites and and say "No, that's not pornographic enough to have a .xxx domain."