When the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) lacked the fortitude to withstand the flurry of protestations against the proposed .xxx domain for pornographic websites, two U.S. Senators took up the cause proposing not just the domain’s creation but also a .com eviction notice.

Typically, domain (e.g. .com, .net, .edu) establishment is left to quasi-independent ICANN, who returned a decided “ICANN’T” after opposition all the way up to the White House condemned the .xxx creation, terming it a “virtual red light district.”

In the same camp were conservative groups Focus on the Family and Family Research Council who felt creating a designated area for pornography would legitimize the trade, not finding it a bit ironic they were blocking measures intended to protect the family.

Let’s play a game. Let’s pretend that psychiatric care legitimizes mental illness and eradicate special treatment and societal confinement. If we pretend insanity doesn’t (or shouldn’t) exist, maybe it will go away. At least we wouldn’t have to deal with it, right?

Meanwhile, Democratic Senators Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Max Baucus of Montana introduce a bill that not only creates the new domain, but also requires pornographic websites to relocate to this domain. In doing so, they’ve united the most unlikely of enemies: the Christian conservative Right and the Free Speech Coalition (an organization that represents the interests of pornographers).

If the sky were ever falling, it’s now.

The Free Speech Coalition has argued that moving domains would place undue burdens on the multi-billion dollar a year industry, costing it in merchandizing and lost visitation. Spokesman Tom Hymes has proposed instead a .kids domain to address the issue of protecting children from viewing pornography. Hymes also promised a challenge to the constitutionality of the bill, reminding the legislature that pornography is protected speech.

Hymes, whose special interest should preclude his argument, fails to acknowledge that the creation of such a domain shifts the burden from pornography producers (who’ve created the issue to start with) to those desperately hoping to shield their children from it. He also ignores that pornography is actively and tenaciously sought, and moving it will not deter its loyal following.

Pornography has taken over a quarter of the total Internet, a prevalence that should remind everyone of its demand as well as its current unavoidability. Of the billion websites that have been created, that translates to 250 million pornographic sites. And no one seems willing to acknowledge that a) it will not be eradicated and b) it is, in its current Wild West state, nearly impossible to avoid.

In July, Senator Joseph Lieberman introduced the Internet Safety and Child Online Protection Act of 2005. The legislation, which imposed a 25% “smut tax” to help fund age-verification enforcement, has been labeled unconstitutional by detractors. The fervor to have the Act passed through the legislature has also led the Dept. of Justice subpoenaing Google and others for searcher information, causing even deeper concerns about constitutionality.

All three approaches (ignoring, shifting of burdens, and governmental overstepping) miss the simpler solution proposed by Pryor and Maucus. Acknowledge the staying power of pornography, identify it (with “know it when I see it” reasoning – we do this with television, we can do it with the Internet), and redirect it to a place where it cannot be accidentally stumbled upon.

If the bill doesn’t include the following, then it should. To avoid complaints of lost and valuable .com domains (or wherever porn exists), a simple 301 redirect or notice of relocation allows owners of pornographic websites to keep those domains (and their merchandising) while providing the proper labeling of adult materials.

We don’t need taxes, any type of free speech restriction, or avenues created where government can unjustly flex its muscle. We do need some common sense however that acknowledges that what has been done doesn’t work, and that there can be a simple mutually beneficial compromise.

But most importantly, we need to create an environment without the risk of, when they are researching for homework or trying to find a fun online game, children cannot easily stumble upon pornography.

"Parents should not have to worry about their children surfing into Web sites for adults, either on purpose or by accident," said Sen. Baucus.

Sen. Pryor agrees and notes the current method of protection:

"The only way parents can really block or screen out or protect their children is literally just stand there and look over their shoulder as they're online," Pryor said. "And it really shouldn't have to be that way."

Original article with reference links here.

__________________
"I never met a Kentuckian who wasn't coming home."--Governor Happy Chandler

<--- Insert Standing Ovation Here --->


Very sound reasoning and logic on the part Senators Pryor and Baucus, I am impressed!

__________________
"North Dakota Fishing Fun!" | Dakota SEO and Design! | Web Design ~ SEO

This idea has been examined for years and overwhelmingly the adult industry has it right. The .xxx is a poor way of handling the issue as the “no adult” on .net and .com names will not be followed and US laws mean nothing to porn pushers abroad.

You would not allow your child to play alone in the street. You want them to have a safe zone behind fences where wild dog or perverts can’t get to them.

The internet is the same. Create a safe haven for kids. No porn producer would ever want to have their sites in a safe zone as they would not be paying customers and that is all porn pushers care about.

I always had parental guard software and watched what my children surfed. To place that burden on others is wrong and a cop out.

Who determines what is “adult” or “art” what is a medical device and what is a sex toy? Smacks of censorship to me.

This is not to mention the value of all of the .com names people have that would be lost on a shift to .XXX. The only way to accomplish this is to allow anyone with the .com name to live out their registration period as .xxx at no additional charge.

I just thought now about the BILLIONS of links out there that would have to change.

__________________
Portals Sales Help Wanted Your Smokies Directory

A .kids domain makes sense to me. Microsoft and other browser makers can default the browser to that area if the parents choose to do so. Porn isn't the only area where kids should not be. If you are going to focus on areas where kids don't need to be then how about a .hate domain for those who hate certain racial groups, a .violence domain for violent material, a .political domain for political messages and so on. And how are you going to categorize websites like youtube where you can find violence and nudity. As usual Americans focus on sex and overlook other dangerous material. It's much simpler to create an area that safe for kids and let the adults have their own area. When I was younger the adults didn't bunch into a corner to converse they told us kids to leave out. This is just another example of the government taking over the responsiblity of lazy parents and why this country will continue to go downhill.

Kids don't have to go on the internet for sex, they can get it on with a schoolmate. I guess some naive parents think if kids never see a breast on TV or the internet that they will never get any interest. When I was elementary school kid I didn't need the internet to know that breasts and the other physical attributes of the female form caught my eye. If some of you are as dedicated to keeping sex out of the minds of kids as you say you are I have a simple solution to that. I can't take credit for it, it's something I noticed in Middle Eastern countries. Cover all females from head to tail in rags that show no cleavage, no hips, no shape of the female form. A little extreme, I think not. Afterall parents do want to keep sex out of the mind of little Jimmy. A woman with large breasts walking in the mall was enough to get my dirty mind revved up at the age of 8. Make the sacrifice America, its for the kid's sake. I don't want to hear any freedom sexist crap. Creating separate school for boys and girls is another idea for keeping sex out of kids minds, it may even bring romance and chivalry back into style. Be creative, go all the way, no half-stepping!!!!

annonymous,

I am not about to relinquish any of my freedoms or rights this country was built on because of this terrible blame game in this country. How about this America:

TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS!

If more people did this, we would not need people to regulate our personal problems.

Your worried about your children being exposed to sex, well install filters to not allow him/her to access on the computer. Same thing for TV, print whatever. Of course I hate to break this to you but sex is part of life and one day you will have to talk to them about it to, just like one day at school they will hear there really is no Santa Clause.

__________________
KBK Marketing | Search Marketing Blog | Cheap Web Hosting

before this gets out of hand...this is a charged subject, for sure. But I think it would behoove all of us to discuss it calmly--and the best way to do that is to steer clear of a "moral discussion" about what America lacks or doesn't. That's a surefire way to have this thread, which addresses a very important issue (and admittedly editorialized), veer off into a shouting match.

More on point:

governmental implications--

business implications--

qualities and drawbacks thereof

Suesheboy brings up good points about who draws the line between porn and art. Maybe it is unrealistic of me to assume that most reasonable people know the difference. We have tiers of content on cable and in movies...somethings are judged R rated, others are judged XXX or NC-17...My preference is that a reasonable person will know what's porn and what's not, but not to go overboard like what was done after Nipplegate.

Suesheboy's other point is similar to the porn industry's point...and one I have to, respectfully, disagree with. My opinion is, if you make them move, then let them keep their .com domains and such. A notice posted letting people know that the sites been moved should solve the problem...as for links, there can redirects to address that...I just thought that the multi-billion dollar porn industry should bear some responsibility for its own production and having them tweak a few things would be a better option than taxation or complete regulation

From a personal angle, I understand that this is not a magic bullet. There will always be the risk...There is filtering software that can be effective (and gotten around)...but that really does place burdens on those who don't deserve it. I'm a new parent, having acquired a pre-teen stepchild. We only allow Internet access on the most public of computers in the house (for obvious teenage boy reasons). And because he has stumbled on some disturbing things while innocently searching (even with safe search activted), we've had to do a lot of monitoring while searching, and restrict him to game sites and wikipedia...and I think it's sad he loses a large chunk of a valuable space.

the .xxx domain and requiring that right ones to move there simplifies the process with automatic filtering and let the boy run educationally free...we can't protect him from everything, true, and we wouldn't want to...but it is a sad thing how difficult it is to create a safe Internet backyard

Another two-cents for what its worth

__________________
"I never met a Kentuckian who wasn't coming home."--Governor Happy Chandler

jmiller,

How do you plan on getting all the adult webmasters around the world to keep porn off of .com and .net? We cant stop spam and phishing and there is far less money driving those industries.

Pandora’s box has been opened already and no way will all the evil creatures go back in the .com box willingly.

Would you be happy with your kid watching a real beheading, people crushing puppies to death or setting them on fire, or some other cruel vile video or still photograph that are all throughout the web? How about how to build a bomb? Bet you can find that on the web!

The .kids can be monitored to be porn, hate, violence free...a true kids safe zone. Nickelodeon has news and it does not show napalmed villages in Vietnam or jumpers from the twin towers, it shows kids safe programming geared towards children.

If the move must be made, some dot com names (some of which are hundreds of thousands of dollars) would be worthless – unless who ever own the DOT COM gets first right of refusal on the DOT XXX then again what about the DOT NET names?

If you look at the economies of the internet from a truly unbiased angle you will see that the adult industry is one of the most driving forces in the internet economy and has been since day 1.

I can guarantee that the internet would not have the advances nor the penetration that it has (no pun intended) without the money and the effort from the adult industry which is funded by many of your neighbors.

__________________
Portals Sales Help Wanted Your Smokies Directory

point taken there, it is a difficult thing...the only difference I would put forth to the violent content on the net is that porn is much more prevalent--at 25% of content out there, it is nearly impossible to avoid...I would support a .kids domain, reluctantly. I would just feel that the wrong folks won the fight. I have no problem with anybody enjoying porn or erotica, as long as they're mature enough to understand it...the boy I am now a father to is still asking silly questions about girls, I don't want him launched from still giggling about breasts and testicles to seeing German Sheiser (or however you spell it).

So lets clarify when I say it would make things simpler. It would make things simpler for those trying very hard to avoid it--not for those peddling it who don't really care who sees it and are making a ton of money...I suppose its a social responsibility thing for me...a little work to redirect is worth the outcome

__________________
"I never met a Kentuckian who wasn't coming home."--Governor Happy Chandler

The .xxx thing is unfortunatly not likely. First of all, there are TONS of links that would need to be changed, plus the forbidden fruit of the .com porn sites would just become a wreck - porn industries would all find ways to get .com extensions.

Here are the facts:

Porn is everywhere. It's a personal choice not to access it. Is it there? Is it tempting? Do TONS of people succumb to it? Yes. (unfortunatly)

Here is the thing, I think the world has had enough of it. I mean, studies are showing that our society is becoming "tired" of the sex in advertisments and everywhere else. It has been overbearing, my gosh, Paris Hilton seductivly washing a war with a hamburger in hand? Give me a break... As the 21st century has brought about a climax of sexual images in advertising and internet (no pun intended... haha) frankly, I think society has had enough.

Studies are showing that society is leaning more toward "wholesome" movies and respond more positivly to advertisments that portray trust, and family fun.

I think the fact that porn consumes 25% of the internet isn't a thing that will be increasing. (I hope not, at least) After all, most people are saying "Eh... been there done that. NOT what it is cracked up to be" Plus, there is such a negative stigma attached to it (and rightly so) Is it because we are becoming desensitized? Most definitally - Our generation will never be the way our fathers were.

Sorry if that was a weee bit off topic...

Katie

__________________
www.Just4YouDesigns.com
Custom Web Design-Great Collections of Webmaster Resources!!!