What we know about .XXX, and what is yet unknown…

In an effort to better understand the information available about support for and opposition against ICM Registry’s .XXX sTLD, I have compiled research material and pulled quotes from adult industry members and non-adult industry members.

Resource materials for listed items have corresponding links at the bottom of the page. Some links are NSFW. Any information that is not accurate since the date of my resource materials, please notify me and I will amend my presentation.

The current state of www.desi.xxx (referred to in the first line item 1 of the first list), and the listing of this site at ICM Registry’s “About” page is current as of this publication date.

What do we know about .XXX?

1. We know that one of the .XXX domains listed on ICM Registry’s “About” page (www.desi.xxx) opens straight to a hardcore porn (within a revolving ad at the top of the page) with no buffer page asking for age verification. (I can provide screen grabs for verification, if requested. It’s worth pointing out because most popular adult sites offer an age verification landing page, regardless of their url designation.)
2. We know that Stuart Lawley has spent millions since 2004 to see the sTLD realized.
3. We know Stuart Lawley has emphatically asserted that he has “no current or historic links to the adult industry in any form.”
4. We know that Stuart Lawley is ICM Registry’s Chairman and President.
5. We know that Stuart Lawley is Chairman of IFFOR Board of Directors.
6. We know that anti-pornography groups oppose .XXX.
7. We know that the greater adult community opposes .XXX.
8. We know that ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee opposes .XXX.
9. We know that adult industry members have come out in protest of .XXX.
10. We know that some of the people who don’t oppose .XXX are people who see the possible regulation aspects of .XXX.
11. We know that .XXX costs, at the very least (but often way more), than six times the average pricing for a .com, .net, etc…
12. We know ICM Registry is charging an application fee for non-adult industry companies who do not want their company associated with a .XXX domain. (Disney®, SmartWater, Mattel®, Ford®, Snuggie®, PlayStation®, Q-tips®, etc…)
13. We know ICM Registry is charging an application fee for adult industry companies who want to secure the trademark rights to their .XXX domain name.
14. We know that adult companies who submit an application must agree to “terms of the adult industry behind .XXX”.
15. We know that ICM Registry will get a lot of exposure as it is sponsoring world champion speedboat racer, Mike Seebold, at this year’s Off Shore World Championships in Key West, Florida.

What we do not know about .XXX?

1. We do not know of the purported list of countless companies and performers in support of .XXX.
2. We do not know, of those from adult who physically participate in pro-.XXX action, why they support .XXX.
3. We do not know why .XXX is being branded as “for the adult entertainment industry” when the majority of the industry opposes it and no performers or companies have come out in vocal, explanative support.
4. We do not know how .XXX will purportedly protect children from child pornography more thoroughly than the already industry funded Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection.
5. We do not know how .XXX will purportedly protect children from child pornography more thoroughly than the already stringent laws for 18 U.S.C. §§2257 and 2257A record-keeping.
6. We do not know specifically how IFFOR plans to keep .XXX from being segregated from other TLD’s on the internet, domestically and internationally.
7. We do not know specifically how ICANN will be prevented from resisting political pressure to regulate the .XXX TLD.

We know Free Speech Coalition has been fighting .XXX for some time now. Of the other people, companies and organizations against .XXX (and only listing people or representatives of companies who have voiced a strong sentiment for their position):

Writer and sex educator, Violet Blue; Christian Mann and John Stagliano of Evil Angel; GAC (Government Advisory Committee); Family Research Council; Assistant Commerce Secretary, Lawrence Strickling; adult industry attorney, Allan Gelbard; adult industry attorney, Paul Cambria; Larry Flynt of Hustler; adult company, Vivid; adult company, Wicked; Connor Young of YNOT.com; Mark Kernes of adult publication, AVN; Colin Rowntree of Wasteland; Dan O’Connell of Girlfriends Films; Allison Vivas of Pink Visuals; Douglas Richter of Adult Webmaster Empire; writer and adult performer Nina Hartley; adult performer Jiz Lee; adult performer April Flores; Joanna Angel of BurningAngel.com; Ron Cadwell of CCBill; Peter Acworth of Kink; Mitch Farber, Netbilling CEO; adult industry attorney, J. D. Obenberger; adult industry attorney,Reed Lee, and many more…

Of the people, companies and organizations for .XXX (and only listing people or representatives of companies who have voiced a strong sentiment for their position):

Writer and sex educator, Jamye Waxman; Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich.; CP80…

(In my research I could not find more than these who voiced very strong support, but I am willing to add to this list if more information can be sent to me via email. I automatically excluded members of Free Speech Coalition and members of ICANN and ICM Registry. If you see any errors, contact me with proof of the error and I will correct it.)

“Designed specifically for the adult industry…” yet without the industry’s direct request. This is a GoDaddy disclaimer. Better yet, the first sentence at http://xxxtld.com reads:

The Adult Industry has been given approval by ICANN to launch their own special Top Level Domain (sTLD), which will be provided under the domain name extension .XXX.

That is misleading. If the adult industry is fundamentally against .XXX, how can it read as if the adult industry requested the top level domain?

It’s enlightening to hear what actual members of the adult community have to say about .XXX, so here are some quotes from adult industry performers and company heads outlining–in their own words–their concerns.

In my opinion .XXX is nothing but a means to extort tens of millions of dollars from the legitimate adult entertainment industry. The lifeblood of adult entertainment producers is their intellectual property; their trademarks. My clients spend years … building their brands, identifying their trademarks and registering their trademarks. Trademarks are protected primarily for the benefit of the public, not the trademark holders, and so there are obligations on trademark orders, and when you understand that if you do not police a trademark–meaning allowing somebody else to exploit your brand name, and not stopping it–that will show you what the .XXX business model is all about. It forces every individual, every comapny in the adult entertainment industry a “Hobson’s choice”: You either have to buy a .XXX domain, or you have to sue somebody to stop them using a .XXX domain … if you don’t you lose your trademarks. That is the ICM business model here. — Allan Gelbard

After more than ten years of very vocal opposition by nearly every company potentially affected by the new .XXX top level domain (TLD) extension, on March 17th 2011 ICANN approved .XXX despite numerous concerns. Chief among those concerned was a prevailing consensus that the creation of the .XXX domain was an simply an underhanded attempt at a money-grab by ICM Registry, the backers and owners of the new domains. Now, the truth of that concern is finally coming to light. — XBiz article entitled, “Porn.xxx Domain Expected To Fetch $50,000 At Auction”

No one is looking at an .XXX domain and thinking, “That’s where I’ll cash in.” They’re thinking, “I better buy my business name, my daughter’s name, and my own name… just in case.”

ICM claims it will only sell domains to those their own 5013c “management” arm IFFOR deems as “officially in the adult entertainment industry.” It is unclear how this is determined. Meanwhile, ICM has already pre-sold over a quarter million domains. — Violet Blue

I want to hone in on [the] “child protection” component that’s being thrown around… The public’s awareness of adult entertainment is largely based on our products, and they’re unaware of our behind-the-scenes efforts. For example, how many [at that meeting] know that for years the adult industry has provided 100% of the funding to the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection? This is a group whose entire purpose is to help protect children and which has been recognized by the U.S. Congress. … In my opinion, ICM is merely using “child protection” as a marketing ploy for .XXX–a marketing ploy that, ironically, draws on the myth and negative stereotypes about the very industry ICM says it wants to serve. But I’ve looked at the .XXX plan in detail, and it does nothing to enhance the [adult] industry’s approach to child protection. Legitimate businesses [we] already label our websites as sexually explicit, we already support groups like ASACP, and adult businesses already maintain meticulous records to prove that all performers are over the age of eighteen and willingly and voluntarily performing. Those who target or exploit minors are part of a sick, criminal internet underworld and are in no way part of the adult internet, or adult industry, at all. — Allison Vivas

I think it’s a very bad idea to put adult content into a virtual ghetto, where access can be cut off t any time, for any so-called “reason.” Billing, banking services, etc., can all be denied with “well, we don’t handle business for .xxx companies,” or some such nonsense.

If it’s to “protect the children,” as it always seems to be, make a safe playground for THEM and create a top-level domain “.kid” with a big fence around it. And make sure ALL material that is put up under that domain is, indeed, safe for children.

We can not make the world a child-safe day nursery, but we can, and should, make safe places for minors to utilize the powers of the Internet without also infringing upon the rights of adults.

It’s not rocket science, people. – Nina Hartley

I, personally, feel this is a content-based classification. And that has been something that, fortunately, the Supreme Court has avoided for many years–in ranking speech [in terms of] political speech being the highest and something else being the lowest. I certainly would never like to see that. I don’t think that should ever happen, and I think [.XXX] is a step in that direction. — Paul Cambria

I just want to go on record to say that profit-making businesses are something, I think, are good for our country. The problem is when you have the interface with regulatory agencies or government-appointed non-profit[s], which is what ICANN is, and they have the power to regulate our industry to the point where they can create a new top level domain… and it’s not a free market; it’s not an open market, and that creates a problem because ICANN has to respond to political pressure. And creating a vehicle for them to respond to political pressure, either through control or some rules or something that might be imposed on a .XXX would be a very bad thing. — John Stagliano

Some have argued for the logical segregation of erotic and/or sexually-oriented materials into a separate top-level domain. Some of them plot and plan for the censorship of such material once the domain has been created and its use made mandatory by local law. The creation of such a TLD is the necessary first step in such a plan and this is where the enterprise should be halted. The existence of such a domain facilitates Internet filtering by moralistic governments with the aim of affecting the ideas and concepts their residents may see and the alternative moral schemes to which they are exposed. The segregation of thought, entertainment, and ideas because of content and appeal is a dangerous first step towards local and parochial control over the global Internet. It paves the way for TLDs aimed at religious and political content. — letter from J. D. Obenberger and Reed Lee to ICANN

FSC, the U.S. adult industry trade association, has been the voice to Internet regulatory agency ICANN and proponents of the online adult ghetto, to tell them that the adult online community DOES NOT SUPPORT a domain that will:

— cost them MILLIONS in unnecessary fees

— subject them to censorship on a global scale

— sets a negative precedent for fragmentation of the Internet

— and will make it EASIER FOR CHILDREN to find adult material online — Cybersocket, DotXXXOpposition.com

“Of course we are disappointed, but we are not surprised by the ICANN board’s decision [to approve dot-xxx],” FSC Executive Director Diane Duke said Friday. “As voiced in concerns by speakers at this very conference, the ICANN board has dangerously undervalued the input from governments worldwide. Worse, [the board has] disregarded overwhelming outpouring of opposition from the adult entertainment industry — the supposed sponsorship community — dismissing the interests of free speech on the internet.” — Diane Duke (taken from YNOT.com)

It’s all about a shady group of people (ICM Registry) setting up shop to make A LOT of money pretending to advocate for the porn industry by ignoring and exploiting those of us already vulnerable to stigma and accustomed to submitting to cutthroat deals and crazy terms. While claiming to be our friends, part of their strategy is to undermine confidence in established .com porn sites by claiming that .xxx sites will be more trustworthy after being approved by their board of greedy know-nothing monkeys or a “policy council” of bros. — “Tasty Trixie” of TitsandSass.com

And people not from the adult industry have also voiced concerns:

There are nations all over the world that will undoubtedly try to force Web sites into the .xxx (top-level domain) or to block Web sites in it that they somehow view as offensive,” Steinhardt said. “I don’t think the operators have taken sufficient account of that problem. It will become a worldwide red-light district for the Internet, into which speakers who have free-expression rights and should be able to reach a mass audience will be forced. — Barry Steinhardt, head of the ACLU’s technology and liberty program

After the second .XXX proposal was approved in 2005, the Family Research Council (FRC) launched a campaign arguing that the TLD would allow pornographers to “expand their evil empires on the Internet.” — taken from ArsTechinca.com

Jamye Waxman has this opposing view to share:

I don’t think I have the popular view here, but I’m for the .xxx domain name for internet porn. The reason being, if it helps detract minors from clicking away, then let’s detract. We have enough problems with providing accurate sex education in the USA, if we separate fantasy fucking from factual sexual information we may be able to set up at least a small divide between the two.

Regardless of the support and the opposition, we must continue to ask questions and keep the conversation going. As outlined by the following general consensus comments, internet censorship is now a much more pressing issue than it was before .XXX.

On my end, I’m all for it. As someone who has to balance a huge commitment to free speech with a personal disgust for in-your-face porn, I think this is great:

Get the pornographers OUT of the dotcom space where people hit them by accident (and maybe, just maybe, OUT of my e-mail inbox, where I really do NOT appreciate them)

Make it harder for minors to get in

Monetize only on the backs of those who voluntarily choose to subsidize this industry

Maybe stop hijacking visitors to non-xxx sites who really don’t want to see this crap?

I really can’t think of a down-side. Can you? — Shel Horowitz, GreenAndProfitable.com

The current .XXX domain-name solution is a bit of a Trojan horse. For all intents and purposes, it solves the problem, making it easy for you to identify and block pornographic websites.

But lurking behind the austere exterior of this solution to Internet pornography is the fact that pornographers are not required to move off of their current .com, .net, etc. address and exclusively use a .xxx domain for pornography.

Nor are they required to put in place any form of protection or verification system that would prevent a child from accessing sexually explicit materials.

So when someone tells you that .xxx can stop pornography, heed the words of Virgil: Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. — CP80 Website

But then there’s the issue of censorship. What if countries or regions decide to simply block the .xxx TLD? Wouldn’t that make the .xxx domains into something of a ghetto? On the other hand, part of the reason for a .xxx TLD is to make it easy to block, so people who don’t want that kind of thing can clearly keep it out.

Then there’s the issue of true dirtbags, those people who sell or purvey smut and don’t want to be restricted to the .xxx domain. Those people might hide their dirty sites amongst the more legitimate domains, effectively countering the benefit of the .xxx domain. — David Gewirtz, ZDNet

1. Will I buy one? No. I have no use for one.

2. Will I do business with those that do? I guess it depends. I likely wouldn’t even know if they owned one or not but if I was starting a new project and needed a sponsor for it I would likely try to use those without .xxx before those with. — commentor on a forum asking “… will you register [a] .xxx …? Why / Why not?”

To view the latest .XXX debate between Stuart Lawley and Diane Duke, visit the FSC Blog.

“What we know about .XXX”: 1. ICMResigtry.com, Desi.xxx (NSFW) 2. CNET.com 3. CNET.com 4. ICMRegistry.com 5. IFFOR.org 6. domain.com, dotster.com, gev.com 7. dotxxxopposition.com, FSC YouTube Channel, see also “Anti List” below 8. gacweb.icann.org, thedomains.com, YNOT.com 9. FSC YouTube Channel 10. CNET.com, domain.com, CP80, ZDNet.com, GreenAndProfitable.com 11. CNET.com 12. hsml.com, Monica Talley 13. hsml.com, FSC Blog, Monica Talley 14. Monica Talley, FSC Blog 15. domainnamewire.com

“What we do not know about .XXX”: 1. .XXX Domain Registration 3. xxxtld.com 4. ICMResigtry.com, asacp.org 5.icmregistry.com, 2257 pdf

Anti List: Violet Blue, Lawrence Strickling, Mark Kernes, April Flores, Jiz Lee, Larry Flynt (Huster CEO), Allison Vivas (PinkVisual CEO), John Stagliano (Evil Angel CEO), Joanna Angel (BurningAngel.com), Ron Cadwell (CCBill CEO), Peter Acworth (Kink CEO), Mitch Farber (Netbilling CEO), Allan Gelbard, Paul Cambria, Vivid, Wicked, Connor Young, Colin, Dan O’Connell, Allison Vivas, Douglas Richter

Pro List: Rep. Fred Upton, CP80,

Comments