ICANN Approves New .XXX Top Level Domain
domainnamewire.com
domainnamewire.com
You could hack the system by only using a .xxx domain for your personal emails when dealing with the state. Tax man: "we can't send you that legal notice because our software blocks that domain" me: "not my problem"
To me, this makes the case of people that want real, imposed censorship weaker, because you can say, "Just block xxx and be done with it". With .com, they can say that someone needs to protect you because you might accidentally go to a bad .com website or something like that, so active filtration is needed. If .xxx becomes the standard and the .com just redirects, it will be easy for people who don't want porn to not get it, people who do want porn to get it, and people charged with filtration to relax a little bit.
Why is this bad? How does it strengthen the argument that the internet should be actively censored?
The point is, .xxx draws a line, and there is quite a bit of disagreement as to what should be on which side of that line.
"I block .xxx but I still saw {thing I don't like}! They should be required to use .xxx!". "I need to access {important_resource.xxx} for {reasonable reason} but my school/university/ISP/telecom/church blocks it!
(Not to mention the whole can-of-worms that is inter-national law. Consider the differences in policy between countries like Saudia Arabia, Sweden, and the US.)
This is all dependent on good adoption of xxx of course, but if the TLD doesn't exist it's not even possible. So we're happy the opportunity is presented, and I think that mainstream pornographers that want social tolerance will prefer the xxx TLD as a means to illustrate their good intentions.
Just because .xxx exists doesn't mean there won't be "pornography" or "offensive materials" on .com/.{foo} addresses. This just provides an excuse for policy and law makers to write legislation saying "Pornography can only be on *.xxx domains".
It's naive to think this will have any effect whatsoever on the availability of porn to your average < 18 year old anywhere in the world.
It will have some effect, I think. I think that most reputable pornographers, in an effort to demonstrate compliance with standards and keep the adults-only vibe that keeps them on the right side of public opinion, will eventually migrate to xxx. It will be easy to block at least some pornography, which isn't to say that a filtered individual can't just go off to a known .com site. Porn will always exist on .com. It does help to some degree, however.
I don't expect the government to pass a law regarding xxx and even if it is passed I don't expect it to be remotely enforceable. .xxx is merely an opportunity to make life easier on everyone, if the standard is widely adopted.
It's also not entirely about filtration. People that want porn can peruse xxx domains and use scripts to highlight and/or prefer links to xxx.
If enough legit stuff starts appearing with an .xxx domain name then there will be pressure to get rid of complete tld blocks.
The first period would allow owners of porn-related trademarks to claim their .xxx domain names and use them as normal, ... the second would enable non-porn companies that don’t want their brands associated with adult material to basically “turn off” their trademarks in .xxx domains, paying a one-time fee. ... The third proposed sunrise would allow owners of non-trademarked porn domains in other TLDs, such as .com, to get their equivalent .xxx using an automated Whois check.
A comment from the author on this item indicates that they hope to begin sunrises in June, landrush in September. I have a feeling they will be expensive.
[1]: http://domainnamewire.com/2010/12/07/xxx-will-have-three-sun...
An internet provider blocks the domain. At first, nobody will complain because "every other media does the same"; then someone will complain, but everyone else will scourge this person as a "perv" and before we realize we have a huge precedent against net neutrality.
Besides, I don't think the internet is so centralized that this could be enforced - people will just register from another country with laxer jurisdiction.
.gov was a bad idea.
.gov.us (or .gov.ca.us) is not.
Outside of obviously regional things. amazon.de and amazon.ca serve their purpose fairly well.
I would agree that the difference between ibm.com and ibm.org and ibm.net is impractical at best.
I don't see the need to have a distinction between amazon.de and amazon.ca. If Amazon wants to segment by country, they can do that on their own, not by offloading onto DNS.
Getting rid of also silly things like .co.uk would be great, but raise lots of uncomfortable questions. Ideally, DNS is would be nationally/politically blind, with the exception of government entities under .gov.*.{gTLD}
With no geographic-based TLDs, you introduce a need to disambiguate non-related brands which would have been perfectly distinguished by ccTLDs. Compare http://www.era.mk/ and http://www.era.pl/ - neither organization is controversial in its right to the TLD in its country, but one or both would have to settle for a disambiguation otherwise.
On a side note, why hasn't a .app TLD been created yet?
Most of these people already get fan sites with some permutation of their full name. (Hyphenation, .net, .org). Maybe now we'll see a common trend if <air quotes> "fan sites".
Now that we have a "NC-17" TLD, are we going to start seeing "R", "PG-13", "PG" and "G" TLDs as well?
Likewise, if the internet is going to have a redlight district, is it going to have a financial district, china town and so on?
.asia ?
.biz?
I thought it was a great name... so I registered neverendingsex.com thinking I could easily monitize it based on the fact that sex.com as a landing page was making several million per year...
But I didnt do anything with the domain and let it die, and someone else grabbed it.