Feds still concerned about .XXX domain

By Liz Tay on Mar 21, 2011 4:43 PM
Filed under Security

TLD approved despite government opposition.

ICANN has approved the .XXX adult content domain after seven years of debate, despite opposition from its Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC).

The domain name regulator moved to enter into an agreement with ICM Registry following a board meeting in Silicon Valley last Friday.

The latest announcement came after a number of decisions and reversals. ICANN initially approved ICM’s application for the top-level domain (TLD) in 2005, but reversed its decision in March 2007.

ICANN’s reversal was later questioned in an independent review. Last June, ICM announced that it would likely launch .XXX early this year; instead, ICANN spent the next nine months in discussions with the public and GAC.

The Australian Government was among those opposing .XXX. Last October, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy told ICANN that there was a “lack of identified public benefit” from the TLD.

A spokesman for the Minister told iTnews today that the Government planned to “continue to work with ICANN to ensure the internet operates in the public benefit”.

Although ICANN claimed that more than 50 percent of the feedback it had received between August and October was in favour of proceeding with the .XXX agreement, Conroy’s spokesman said 89 percent of respondents to a March 2010 consultation opposed .XXX.

“There is significant opposition to .XXX from the general public and key stakeholders,” she said. “Representatives from family groups and the adult industry have strongly opposed .XXX.”

Rather than segregating adult content from the rest of the web, the Australian Government believed that content providers would replicate existing .com sites onto .XXX domains.

Accordingly, there was “no connection” between the new domain and the Government’s plans to introduce a mandatory, ISP-level internet filter aimed at blocking Refused Classification content in Australia.

“.XXX would not assist the community in avoiding adult content, because adult content would not be prohibited on other top level domains, such as .com,” the spokesman said.

“It is likely that adult sites would simply be replicated on .XXX rather than replacing existing sites.”

ICANN acknowledged at last week’s meeting that its actions might not be consistent with GAC advice; however, it believed ICM’s application to have addressed governmental concerns.

“Given the contention in the community regarding the introduction of the .XXX sTLD, any decision on the registry agreement will result in both a positive and negative community impact,” the regulator wrote (pdf).

“On the whole, the Board concludes that ICANN’s adherence to its accountability mechanisms, and completion of the processing of ICM’s 2004 sTLD application will provide a positive community impact.

“Refusing to approve registry agreements with strings that do not have unanimous community support is not an acceptable option as ICANN continues to move toward the introduction of even more new gTLDs.”

10 comments in this discussion

"umbria wrote: The problem is that Internet porn has destroyed many lives and many marriages. Giving an uncensorable top level domain to these exploiters of children, women and human weakness ..."

By HubertCumberdale

Tags

xxx, icann, tld, domain, filter, conroy

ICANN 'glitch' let gTLD rivals see user details

Software glitch delays ICANN's '.brand' deadline

Conroy, Turnbull joust over NBN equity numbers

Telstra, Optus, TPG buy $2bn of mobile spectrum

Breaking Stories

TransGrid makes the leap to Windows 7

QLD energy provider to outsource IT services

Dotcom threatens to sue web giants over patent 'infringement'

Police tap social media in wake of London attack

Australia joins open government forum

Readers of this article also read...

Comments: 10

bcmobile Mar 21, 2011 7:25 PM	Of course Conboy opposes this move. It makes his already weak case for mandatory filtering even weaker.
Craigs Mar 21, 2011 8:54 PM	Oh well if Conroy opposes it then it must be a good idea. He's so useful to have around. Just do the opposite of whatever he says and you'll be sweet.
Ace Mar 21, 2011 10:48 PM	I like the way Conroys spokesperson put "Family Groups" and the "Adult Industry" together in one happy sentence. - “Representatives from family groups and the adult industry have strongly opposed .XXX.” Awesome.
anonymous Mar 22, 2011 1:22 PM	@Ace, yes, isn't it interesting how the direction of political hot air changes to suit the current spin? When referring to imposing secret government censorship, Conboy likes to claim the 'stakeholders' support what he wants to do. Then we learn that the only stakeholders he seems to have consulted, and listened to, are all from the god industry and it's offshoots. No mention at all of anything involving adult input then.
Thysce Mar 22, 2011 3:05 PM	I thought the adult industry was supported by the ASP. If they're being spoken for by someone who supports the ACL and FF, then something is wrong with this report and citation would be required about this spokesperson's claims as it's virtually an opposite effect.
legless Mar 22, 2011 6:01 PM	Of course the "family groups" (ie Christian Lobby Groups) are against it as they reckon it will make porn sites easier to find (oh boohoo) and of course certain areas of the adult industry are against it as it will make porn sites easier to avoid. All "adult" sites should be given 1 or 2 years to migrate to a .xxx domain or be shut down. Let's face it, Conroy's only supporters seem to be the "family groups" as they are the ones he quotes so often in his comments. He doesn't have mainstream support for anything he says.
HubertCumberdale Mar 22, 2011 9:37 PM	Quote: “It is likely that adult sites would simply be replicated on .XXX rather than replacing existing sites.” I dont understand what the problem is. Humans like to categorise things, the more intelligent among us are able to understand that some things can fit into more than one category. Adult sites can either be .com or .xxx or both. No reason why they cant... so it it is easier to type three x's in a row rather than move your fingers all over the keyboard typing com so what. The sun will still rise in the morning and the sky will not fall.
umbria Mar 22, 2011 11:35 PM	Hubert, "I don't understand what the problem is ... The sun will still rise in the morning and the sky will not fall." The problem is that Internet porn has destroyed many lives and many marriages. Giving an uncensorable top level domain to these exploiters of children, women and human weakness whose sole interest is monetary gain will indeed cause the sky to fall on some. The point is not that the sites will be hosted in .COM and .XXX domains, but that it will be impossible to deny any content from appearing in the .XXX space, to the detriment of moral development of young and older people who fall into it. Like the cigarette lobby of old (and even today in some countries) promoting its coffin nails as good for your stress reduction, sex slave traffickers will be able to defend their patch of the internet from any kind of limit as to content the put online. Porn is never victimless. That is the problem.
Thysce Mar 22, 2011 11:39 PM	legless, adult sites adopting their own .xxx domain won't require migrating. They can simply setup DNS redirect through whichever domain name provider they purchase it off. Why would they want to let go of their .com name?
HubertCumberdale Mar 23, 2011 12:47 AM	umbria wrote: The problem is that Internet porn has destroyed many lives and many marriages. Giving an uncensorable top level domain to these exploiters of children, women and human weakness whose sole interest is monetary gain will indeed cause the sky to fall on some. The point is not that the sites will be hosted in .COM and .XXX domains, but that it will be impossible to deny any content from appearing in the .XXX space, to the detriment of moral development of young and older people who fall into it. Like the cigarette lobby of old (and even today in some countries) promoting its coffin nails as good for your stress reduction, sex slave traffickers will be able to defend their patch of the internet from any kind of limit as to content the put online. Porn is never victimless. That is the problem. This is either a joke post (in which case it is quite hilarious) or you really dont know what you are talking about and I suspect you wear hats made out of tinfoil.