.XXX TLD Isnt Going To Happen :)

Printable View

03-30-2006, 11:20 PM
Lee

.XXX TLD Isnt Going To Happen :)

A SPECIAL domain for sex websites has bitten the dust at an international meeting in New Zealand today, with Australia, the US and the European Union moving to kill off a proposal for ICANN to create a ".xxx" domain for pornography.

Amid vociferous opposition, ICANN, the international body that is responsible for internet domain names, has been considering a proposal by US company ICM Registry for the new code.
But governments have been fighting a rearguard action to have the plan canned, with the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission writing to ICANN opposing the proposal.

Australia brought the issue to a head earlier this week with Communications Minister Helen Coonan saying she had "serious concerns" that the domain would legitimise illegal material.

ICANN's governmental advisory committee today put the nail in the coffin of .xxx, saying "several (governments) are emphatically opposed from a public policy perspective to the introduction of .xxx".

The grouping - which represents governments - said special protections for children and provisions to help law enforcement agencies identify the owners of web sites promised by the registry had not been included in its contract.

"In its application ... ICM Registry promised a range of public interest benefits as part of its bid to operate the .xxx domain," said GAC chairman Sharil Tarmizi, who represents the Malaysian Government. "To GAC's knowledge these undertakings have not yet been included as obligations in the proposed registry agreement negotiated with ICANN."

http://australianit.news.com.au/arti...nbv%5E,00.html

Excellent news as far as im concerned :thumbsup:

Seems like common sense has prevailed :)

Regards,

Lee
03-30-2006, 11:26 PM
gaystoryman

Yep fantastic news... :thumbsup:
03-31-2006, 01:05 AM
hdkbill

So nice to see common sense prevail.....and it so seldom happens!!!!

Yippee,

Bill
03-31-2006, 02:06 AM
AusCoding Allan

It's good to see that common sense has prevailed!

It's also interesting to note that ICANN actually listened to the Australian Government's view, this is quite unusual.

All's well that ends well.

Cheers,

Allan
03-31-2006, 08:58 AM
Dzinerbear

Excellent. I think the proposed legislation in the US right now pushed this one to die. I'd still really like to see ICANN push ahead with a .KIDS domain.

Cheers
Michael
03-31-2006, 09:57 AM
Northstar

Great news! I also think .kids domains would be a great solution.
03-31-2006, 11:50 AM
BijouWorld

Just another example of how freaking out of touch the blow hards in DC are. It's such a poor technical solution to use an XXX domain. It sounds like something a guy without any experience on with web technology would come up with.

Anyway, in Florida, they've said that "Rated X" (or XX or XXX or XXXXXX) is insufficient. Videos must now be labeled "NR Not Rated". "Hi right hand, how are you? My name is left hand."
03-31-2006, 01:09 PM
gaybucks_chip

Quote:

Originally Posted by BijouWorld

Just another example of how freaking out of touch the blow hards in DC are. It's such a poor technical solution to use an XXX domain. It sounds like something a guy without any experience on with web technology would come up with.

Anyway, in Florida, they've said that "Rated X" (or XX or XXX or XXXXXX) is insufficient. Videos must now be labeled "NR Not Rated". "Hi right hand, how are you? My name is left hand."

That's an interesting point, actually. The MPAA's film board bestows ratings, and I suppose that one could argue that an X rating implies the film board has actually reviewed the film... and I certainly don't know anyone in adult who pays the $ to submit one of their masterpieces to the MPAA for a rating :)

But it seems stupid to require an NR rating, because that has a completely different meaning; LOTS of independent films are NR because there's no budget to submit them to the film board, even though they'd get a PG or PG13.

An aside for anyone old enough to possibly remember: I vaguely remember when film ratings started, I think it was in the late 1960s. I do remember that the original ratings were FA (Family Audience), M (Mature Audience), R, and X. Does anyone know if adult films were known as "X rated movies" before the motion picture rating system?
03-31-2006, 01:12 PM
gaybucks_chip

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

The grouping - which represents governments - said special protections for children and provisions to help law enforcement agencies identify the owners of web sites promised by the registry had not been included in its contract.

"In its application ... ICM Registry promised a range of public interest benefits as part of its bid to operate the .xxx domain," said GAC chairman Sharil Tarmizi, who represents the Malaysian Government. "To GAC's knowledge these undertakings have not yet been included as obligations in the proposed registry agreement negotiated with ICANN."

Does anyone know if the proposal is completely dead, or if ICM plans to implement the (rather chilling) notion of "helping law enforcement identify owners of websites" and then resubmit?
03-31-2006, 03:29 PM
BijouWorld

Rated X, Etc.

Here's a good resource on the "X Rating". It was originally an MPAA rating, but the MPAA failed to copyright it, so anyone could apply it, with or without MPAA review.

Apparently, in Florida, there is a new statute that requires all videos to be reviewed by a nationally recognized organization (such as MPAA) or be labeled NR - Not Rated.

Everything you'd ever care to know about the history of X Rating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_rating

And everything (and probably more than) you'd ever want to know about the MPAA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpaa
03-31-2006, 04:10 PM
hdkbill

Just finished reading an aritcle about a couple of bookstores that have been raided in Florida for not having an "X" rating or " NR - not rated" logo on their videos and dvds.

Makes me wonder if perhaps we should start putting the "X" rating on the covers of all of our covers in order to offer some type of protection for bookstores we sell to in Florida.

We already have "XXX" on the covers on all of the new ones and placing them on older titles as we re-order covers....wonder if that suffices?

Bill
03-31-2006, 06:44 PM
BijouWorld

We're changing all labels to now, not only say X Rated, but also include a NR Not Rated logo. We're covering all our bases...figure more is better when and if that day comes that we have to defend ourselves in court again.
03-31-2006, 07:04 PM
hdkbill

Quote:

Originally Posted by BijouWorld

We're changing all labels to now, not only say X Rated, but also include a NR Not Rated logo. We're covering all our bases...figure more is better when and if that day comes that we have to defend ourselves in court again.

Ken,

Is there no problem using the NR rating since it is supposedly copyrighted by the MPAA?

Bill
04-03-2006, 04:57 PM
BijouWorld

Hey there, my understanding is that labeling a film as "NR"/Not Rated indicates that the MPAA did not rate it (hence the term, Not Rated), and it is not trademarked by the MPAA.

According to the MPAA's website, the only ratings that they use are: G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17.
04-03-2006, 04:59 PM
basschick

the article i read said they will vote in the summer (june as i recall). so it's not dead but they're not willing to fast track it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boyfunk

Does anyone know if the proposal is completely dead, or if ICM plans to implement the (rather chilling) notion of "helping law enforcement identify owners of websites" and then resubmit?
04-04-2006, 12:40 AM
hdkbill

Quote:

Originally Posted by BijouWorld

Hey there, my understanding is that labeling a film as "NR"/Not Rated indicates that the MPAA did not rate it (hence the term, Not Rated), and it is not trademarked by the MPAA.

According to the MPAA's website, the only ratings that they use are: G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17.

Ken,

Thanks for the info. Really appreciate it.

Bill