Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

ICANN Approves .xxx Suffix For Porn Websites

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the if-you-build-it dept.

The Internet 273

An anonymous reader tips news that ICANN has officially approved the creation of a .xxx suffix for porn sites, confirming the rumors we discussed on Thursday. While this resolves a 10-year debate on the subject, the Guardian notes that "many pornography companies are unhappy with the idea of a dedicated space online because they expect that as soon as .xxx is implemented, conservative members of the US Congress will lobby to make any sex-related website re-register there and remove itself from other domains such as .com or .org." Others are more confident, like Stuart Lawley of ICM Registry, the company sponsoring the new TLD. "Mr. Lawley said more than 100,000 domains had preregistered. He said he expected that when the dot-xxx domains opened for business, nine to 12 months from now, some 500,000 domains would register, or roughly 10% of the five million to six million adult online sites."

cancel ×

273 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

100,000 preregistered? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709238)

I'm sure that 90% of those preregistrations are by domain name squatters.

"Domain name squatters" (5, Funny)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709258)

(Tries to imagine hot chick squatting on a domain)

[fails, shrugs] I guess there really is a site for every kind of fetish.

Re:"Domain name squatters" (1)

Greyor (714722) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709792)

Obligatory:
Rule 34 [encycloped...matica.com] .

Re:100,000 preregistered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709276)

great, now can we quit making a big deal of this phony .xxx domain name controversy?

Re:100,000 preregistered? (4, Insightful)

ericlondaits (32714) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709624)

DNS is just a big extortion racket... I can imagine that Google will make sure to register google.xxx, gmail.xxx, youtube.xxx, etc. just like Facebook and any other big site. Celebrities are probably being advised to register their names (e.g. sandrabullock.xxx). It's the same as with the .net and .org domains defensive registering but much worse.

Ironically, big porn sites will probably want to keep their .com domain around anyway. I can't imagine Vivid leaving vivid.com to someone else, to name one.

a little premature (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709252)

First post.... a little premature I know, but......

Re:a little premature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709606)

Not Redundant. Funny. Premature... Get it.
Yet again, Slashdot + Sarcasm = -1 Mod & lower Karma.

What is the point? (4, Insightful)

axl917 (1542205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709280)

All this will do is rake in registration $$$ and have zero effect on anything else. Take any site for example, like youporn.com. They will go register youporn.xxx so they have their name protected, and one will redirect to the other. If some other company tried to register youporn.xxx out from under them, the real site would just sue and claim it.

They won't give up their .com addresses, so nothing will change.

Re:What is the point? (4, Interesting)

ciderVisor (1318765) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709326)

They will go register youporn.xxx so they have their name protected, and one will redirect to the other.

But if the .com address always redirects to the .xxx address, then firewalls could be easily configured to disallow all .xxx domains.

I guess that's one possible plus point.

Re:What is the point? (4, Interesting)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709370)

Most likely the .xxx will redirect to the .com so all internal and external links will remain working and you won't have to convert or test anything.

Redirecting .xxx to .com is much faster, easier and cheaper than vice versa and without the risk of being blocked by firewalls or filters.

Re:What is the point? (4, Insightful)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709612)

There will be real effects. Consider - in the US we have had recent obscenity convictions against some porn producers seen as turning out content especially degrading to women (slapping, punching, spitting in faces, and faux rape.). We haven't had anything in well over a decade focused on non-violent porn, targeting gay porn selectively has apparently died out even in the south, and even such things as bondage and fisting videos get a pass, (but many of them are careful to have spoken discliamers from the submissives involved and various "no sluts were harmed in the making of this video" claims included to protect themselves). Scat probably would draw legal action, but the mainstream producers haven't tried that. The industry has been vocally extremely divided over violence for the last few years.
      I'd just about bet real money that some porn producers will use .xxx to prove they are being responsible corporations and trying to keep their material out of the hands of minors, because that would be another way to protect themselves from prosecution, and they seem to be willing to go to some trouble over creating an image that they are not one of 'those' porn businesses, but rather one of the 'other' ones. Some will see it as a financial hit to move content exclusively to .xxx domains, but others will see it as another way to avoid being the rare porn producer singled out.
      The bigest force actually working against this is the evangelical right, which usually sees no difference between a Girls Gone Wild video and Underaged Wet Mule Sodomizers part 83. If they focused their complaints on the companies that produce the kinkiest stuff, they'd get a lot more results from various justice departments, but then they would have to admit that some porn producers really do care if all the 'models' are over 18, really do show safe sex practices, or avoid violent sex, so don't hold your breath.

Re:What is the point? (3, Funny)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709720)

The bigest force actually working against this is the evangelical right, which usually sees no difference between a Girls Gone Wild video and Underaged Wet Mule Sodomizers part 83.

Of course they can't see the difference. To see it, they would have to watch it. :-)

Re:What is the point? (4, Funny)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709378)

They're more likely to serve both from the same machine, just with different virtual host names. No need to redirect.

Besides, at $60 a domain, when a dot.com is $10, that's obscene!

Re:What is the point? (5, Funny)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709396)

Besides, at $60 a domain, when a dot.com is $10, that's obscene!

Well, obscenity is to be expected for that domain. :-)

Re:What is the point? (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709464)

So what you're saying is that getting screwed on the price is normal?

Re:What is the point? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709516)

so what you're saying is you're not nearly as clever as the poster you replied to?

Re:What is the point? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709468)

Not necessarily, it really depends on what they're giving for that $60. If it's just a registration without any extras, then yes it is. However some TLDs are more exclusive than others, while pretty much anybody can get a .com, .net or .org domain name, it's tough to get a .gov or .edu without jumping through a number of hoops.

For the .xxx TLD, it could ultimately be a bargain if it allows for porn sites to demonstrate that they aren't just using random shots which haven't been vetted to be legal or that they aren't just a front for organized crime.

Re:What is the point? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709618)

For $60, they're not doing any "vetting" beyond "did the check/cc clear?"

Back when a dot-com was $100 (remember those days?) it wasn't any different.

Re:What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709672)

The difference is that the $60/year will actually go to pay for something on .xxx, not just the financial black hole of Verisign.

The bad news is that it will pay for the operation of a private regulatory agency that will stick its nose into your business practices, tell you what kind of content you can/cannot include on your site, etc. For better or worse, .xxx will not the be the wild wild west.

Re:What is the point? (1)

dmomo (256005) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709680)

Not entirely true if they are gunning for SEO. Google looks for the "canonical" meta keyword, but people are still paranoid about serving duplicate content, and this would certainly count as that.

Re:What is the point? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709336)

That's about it ... after all, the claim:

The company sponsoring the dot-xxx domain, the ICM Registry, said it had a vision of a red-light district in cyberspace that was a clean, well-lighted place, free of spam, viruses and credit card thieves.

... is totally unbelievable. It will be just another hub for spam, viruses, and credit card thieves.

Re:What is the point? (1)

Deus.1.01 (946808) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709480)

Oh...There's a blogspot.xxx already?

Re:What is the point? (1)

Dumnezeu (1673634) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709418)

He said he expected that when the dot-xxx domains opened for business, nine to 12 months from now, some 500,000 domains would register, or roughly 10 percent of the five million to six million adult online sites.

Unfortunately, you're right. This new TLD is an ICANN scheme to bring in more money from their existing customers; to be more precise, they just decided that ICM Registry should get 10% of the porn market investment in domain names.

I don't see the problem (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709660)

Companies will need to protect their names and if someone starts a .xxx site with an other companies website, it would damage their reputation. I don't think the general public is capable of understanding that Slashdot.org and Slashdot.xxx are really two different entities. Or BP.com and BP.xxx or etc....

OTH, folks do seem to know that Whitehouse.com and Whitehouse.gov are two different entities. Would they with a business or other entity?

I didn't know... (-1, Troll)

CasualFriday (1804992) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709314)

...that Vin Diesel [imdb.com] was this popular.

Re:I didn't know... (1)

Sebilrazen (870600) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709412)

no, it's Ice Cube [imdb.com] that's the popular one.

Wtf is xxx? (5, Insightful)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709324)

It is only in the US that xxx is equivalent to porn. In other languages, xxx means crossed over or censored. So why the fuck is the new tld called "xxx" when the porn link is only obvious to Americans? Isn't ICANN supposted to care about the whole world and not just the US? If they wanted a porn tld, they could have called it ".porn," ".adult" or even ".sex" both which would have been more logical than ".xxx" Is it because the word "porn" is so dirty you have to call it "xxx" instead and pretend it is something else?

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709334)

Yes.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

blai (1380673) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709346)

well? you think "sex" means sex in other languages?

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709410)

Sex is a proper word. XXX is just gibberish.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (5, Informative)

Ziekheid (1427027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709384)

Nope, xxx is actually recognised in a lot of countries. I have never heard of it meaning crossed/censored before.
I just asked people from Germany, England, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden (IRC ftw) and they all knew what it meant.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709528)

I just asked people from Germany, England, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden (IRC ftw) and they all knew what it meant.

Ever heard of sampling bias?

I know what it means, but mainly because I read Slashdot.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (3, Insightful)

Knoeki (1149769) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709592)

I'd say it's more likely that has to do with the fact that they're people on the internet.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709642)

Surely, you must have seen it used in phone numbers, for example 070/XX XXX XXX. Sure they know what it means because they jack off a lot and know everything about American culture. Use google.de or google.nl and search for the most common meanings of xxx in those languages. In Seden, there are companies called XXX Architects and Design XXX. Neither of them have anything to do with porn. Instead the XXX is used to mean "extra extra extra." Probably they think they are really good at what they do.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709386)

Heh.....it will mean that soon. And not just in English: all over the internet using world, in any country with a reasonable size user base, no matter what language they speak, xxx will come to mean porn. So enjoy.

Incidentally, xxx comes from our movie rating system, where xxx is the most obscene type of porn.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0, Troll)

Lazareth (1756336) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709482)

Incidently, no. "xxx" comes from old wordfilters on school nets, where blacklisted words were replaced by x's instead. Guess what sex got replaced with? Yup, "xxx".

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0, Offtopic)

quantumplacet (1195335) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709580)

Incidentally, no, XXX goes back to porn promoters in the 1970s, long before 'school nets'. Incidentally, you also can't spell incidentally.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (2, Informative)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709614)

Incidently, no. "xxx" comes from old wordfilters on school nets, where blacklisted words were replaced by x's instead. Guess what sex got replaced with? Yup, "xxx".

No, GPP is right. "XXX" far predates the widespread use of networking in schools, and comes from the movie industry. The story goes something like this: when the MPAA created its film rating system in the 1960s, they copyrighted all the ratings but X. So if you said you were making a G-rated or R-rated movie, say, you had to get the MPAA to sign off on it, but you could rate your movie X without any approval. If you submitted a porn movie (or occasionally a very violent movie) to the MPAA, they'd obligingly slap an X on it, but it wasn't a requirement. The porn industry being what it is, porn movie producers decided that just "rated X" wasn't strong enough to get their target audience's attention, and started slapping the label "rated XXX" on the hardcore stuff. It didn't really mean anything, of course, but it was apparently an effective marketing ploy. Eventually the MPAA decided that they didn't want to be associated with X and XXX at all any more, and stopped rating movies X altogether, replacing it in their ratings scheme with NC-17.

Except for that last bit, all of this happened in the 1960s and early 1970s, at a time when the number of schoolkids using any kind of networking technology was vanishingly small. Trust me, when you register "barelylegalteenlesbians.xxx" it's not images of PLATO you'll be evoking.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709704)

Correct except that the MPAA trademarked their ratings, not copyright. You cannot copyright a letter.

phantomfive was close, you weren't (3, Informative)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709630)

See this explanation [straightdope.com] . phantomfive (GP) was almost correct, except that the movie rating system didn't have any rating more obscene than "X", porn movie advertisers/marketers invented the "XXX" as even more shocking than "X". And because of the "misuse" of X, the MPAA has moved to calling it "NC-17" [wikipedia.org] which is hard to twist into a marketing advantage.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709534)

Incidentally, xxx comes from our movie rating system, where xxx is the most obscene type of porn.

No it isn't.

X is the rating. There is another rating nearly equivalnet, NC-17, which was brought about because X became to mean porn.

XXX is movie publisher hype and gibberish.

What this new domain will do: Nothing. It's a boondoggle for someone to rake in money for duplicate registrations.

ICANN continues to break the DNS system through its stupid politics. Who, honestly, operates a web business solely registered under the TLD .biz?

--
BMO

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709602)

> What this new domain will do: Nothing. It's a boondoggle for someone to rake in money for duplicate registrations.

It may make it easier to search for porn :).

e.g. google for: site:xxx your keywords here

Not that searching for porn is that hard.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709690)

You're an amateur.

Use Google Translate to find more different porn.

--
BMO

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709414)

"xxx" is also a designation for alcoholic beverages, so I guess at least one of the producers of those will end up registering those sites eventually, if only to be clever.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (4, Informative)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709434)

Actually, quite a few languages use "xxx" as a placeholder for "adult", "porn" and the likes. I have seen it used as such in practically every country I've ever been to.

Words like "adult", "porn", and -- to a lesser extend -- "sex" are English words that have no meaning in other languages. "xxx" is pretty universal in that it isn't actually a real word that would need translation.

Sex = 6 in Swedish (1)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709788)

> "sex" are English words that have no meaning in other languages

Sex = 6 in Swedish. I thought this was hilarious when I found out --- OTOH, I was a bit tipsy at the time.

sexuality is censored (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709492)

"It is only in the US that xxx is equivalent to porn. In other languages, xxx means crossed over or censored"

so in countries besides the usa sexuality isn't the biggest target for censorship?

and i said "in countries besides the usa" not "my own special subset of liberal european countries i use to ridicule the usa's policies, rather than the full set of countries in the world, revealing that the usa is actually moderate or left of center on most issues, and even more left leaning on some free speech issues than supposedly liberal european countries"

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709600)

.com isn't language free so why should .xxx be?

Re:Wtf is xxx? (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709742)

Be patient, in 10 years .porn, .adult and .sex will be available as well. This will help to eliminate any confusion. TLDs are getting better all the time. What would we do without .mobi, .name, .museum, .biz, .coop, .info, .int, .jobs, .pro, .tel, and .travel?

TLDs are bullshit. Just search slashdot.com or slashdot.net if you don't believe me.

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709748)

I'm with you on this one. I will eventually have to change my clear and simple asm.org domain into the much more difficult to remember the-fictitious-movie-rating-of-america.xxx. ;)

Re:Wtf is xxx? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709800)

It is only in the US that xxx is equivalent to porn. In other languages, xxx means crossed over or censored. So why the fuck is the new tld called "xxx" when the porn link is only obvious to Americans? Isn't ICANN supposted to care about the whole world and not just the US? If they wanted a porn tld, they could have called it ".porn," ".adult" or even ".sex" both which would have been more logical than ".xxx" Is it because the word "porn" is so dirty you have to call it "xxx" instead and pretend it is something else?

Well they couldn't use .sex either because not all adult content necessarily involves sex.

We should just settle for something that would be recognizable to the entire internet community, .fap

it took me a while to figure this one out (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709342)

They've been trying to get a .xxx domain for a long time, but I couldn't figure out why. The porn industry opposes it, the people who oppose the porn industry oppose it, and tech people generally oppose it. Took me a while to realize it was only some registrars who wanted some extra cash who kept bringing it up.

My question is, why did ICANN finally relent? Were they bribed? Did they just become impatient over the issue that they've said 'no' to for over a decade? Is it possible to get anything passed through ICANN if you just ask enough times? Why is ICANN supporting this blatant rent-seeking?

Re:it took me a while to figure this one out (5, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709400)

Because the ICANN board is chosen by domain registrars who stand the most to gain by introduction of a new TLD.

Re:it took me a while to figure this one out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709420)

Someone at ICANN finally got offered a big enough kick-back to support it, is my guess.

Re:it took me a while to figure this one out (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709424)

They've been trying to get a .xxx domain for a long time, but I couldn't figure out why. The porn industry opposes it, the people who oppose the porn industry oppose it, and tech people generally oppose it. Took me a while to realize it was only some registrars who wanted some extra cash who kept bringing it up.

My question is, why did ICANN finally relent? Were they bribed? Did they just become impatient over the issue that they've said 'no' to for over a decade? Is it possible to get anything passed through ICANN if you just ask enough times? Why is ICANN supporting this blatant rent-seeking?

Next: A TLD ".pirate" reserved to pirating sites. Makes it easier for the **AA to find the people to sue. :-)

Re:it took me a while to figure this one out (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709520)

It's not a question of why they finally relented so much as what took so long. There's no inherent reason why this should've taken so long. The reasoning was that the conservatives don't want any porn anywhere, and the porn industry was concerned about being relegated to a ghetto TLD.

But, ultimately, this is probably a good thing, since .com wasn't ever really very well monitored with respect to child porn and criminal activity. One of the promises that ICM has made is that there will be no child porn on the TLD. Which is probably a part of where the hefty registration fee is coming from. Trying to do that is going to cost a goodly sum of money each year. Ultimately, time will tell whether or not this worked, but I'd say it's probably going to be good for all those involved.

Well, that is assuming that we can keep the conservatives in check about using it as a dumping ground for things that "moral Christians" oppose in public. Like sex education and GLBT information sites.

Can't work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709348)

When will they finally understand that a .xxx tld _can't work_?

If it's optional for porn sites to use .xxx domains, it won't have any use - the people running porn sites want to make money so they won't use .xxx domains for their content exclusively, they will always have a backup domain outside of .xxx. They know very well that .xxx could be easily blocked in corporate networks or even at ISP level (= less possible customers = less money), so they will make damn sure not to rely on .xxx domains.

If you wanted to force porn sites into .xxx, you'd have to do it internationally, and you'd have to come up with international definition for "porn" - what would have to go into .xxx, and what could stay outside. Who could come up with a definition that satisfies the most liberal and the most conservative contries at the same time? Who would make sure that no porn sites escape? What would happen to non-.xxx domains that host porn? What would happen to normal sites that have a few nude pictures (like tabloid sites) - would they be removed from the internet like Apple removed non-conforming apps from the App Store?

Re:Can't work (3, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709540)

Sure it can, if the registrar makes good on its pledge to ban child porn from the TLD, that would likely be a significant draw to porn sites. Especially ones that are asking for people to pay. With $60 a year in registration fees, it's not going to make much difference off the bottom line of a decent site, but being able to say that you're free of unadvertised impropriety can easily add up to big sales. People that frequent those sites are often times concerned about things like kiddie pr0n and becoming a victim of ID theft. If the registrar manages to crack down on that more than the .com registrars do, then it's likely going to make much larger sums of money.

Re:Can't work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709760)

Sure it can, if the registrar makes good on its pledge to ban child porn from the TLD, that would likely be a significant draw to porn sites. Especially ones that are asking for people to pay. With $60 a year in registration fees, it's not going to make much difference off the bottom line of a decent site, but being able to say that you're free of unadvertised impropriety can easily add up to big sales. People that frequent those sites are often times concerned about things like kiddie pr0n and becoming a victim of ID theft. If the registrar manages to crack down on that more than the .com registrars do, then it's likely going to make much larger sums of money.

Really?? I have trouble believing that. How could a TLD possibly manage that, are they going to require records for every model, perform audits and comb through every site? No they'll do same thing google does to keep it off, wait till someone complains then review and remove.

And I really doubt it has much effect on customer base, if I don't want to see something then I turn it off. I as the viewer can't ever be certain of the model's age, but I can be certain they appear to be adults.

Is xxx trademarked? (1)

divisionbyzero (300681) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709354)

If not, someone should get on that...

And Chinese Internationalized Domain Names (3, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709362)

More importantly (at least according to Ars Technica [arstechnica.com] ) is that ICANN approved Chinese internationalized domain names in this same update notification. What's the big deal with the XXX domain? Okay so now I know that the porn site I'm going to is actually a porn site ... big deal. Ain't going to help filters all that much anyway unless it's required which would be really stupid and shortsighted. I think the changes for a billion Chinese speakers is bigger news.

Terrible idea (4, Insightful)

TuballoyThunder (534063) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709364)

I think the concept behind the .xxx domain has the potential of leading the internet down a dangerous path. If the other TLD's are forced by their governing entity, e.g. the US government for the .com TLD, to prohibit pornographic content, the precedent will be set to segregate and regulate content.

Re:Terrible idea (2, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709658)

I have to admit to mixed feelings about this. There's an obvious danger of censorship, and I don't want to see anything on the internet, porn or anything else, pushed into a walled garden. But I'm old enough to remember when .org and .net actually meant something, and I'd actually like to see much stricter standards applied to who can register for those. The precedent is already set; it just hasn't been followed for years. It's a dilemma.

What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (5, Funny)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709376)

Register yourname.xxx as your personal homepage, and give it out to all of your friends and coworkers! When they ask, "Umm, is this...", respond with, "You'll just have to go find out, now won't you?", and follow with a wink and a wry smile. Of course, you always could, you know, if you wanted...

Re:What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709466)

Just wait for facebook.xxx :-)

Although, I guess faces isn't exactly what .xxx visitors want to see ...

Re:What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (1)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709504)

It depends on what is on the faces.

Re:What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (2, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709548)

That's an excellent way of getting sued for sexual harassment. Even if there isn't any porn on there, I suspect you could still find yourself sued or fired.

Re:What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709610)

Whooooooooooooosh!

Re:What a great opportunity to creep everyone out! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709622)

What about Vin Diesel Or Ice Cube? Surely they could make a .XXX website without fear of legal retribution.

why do people think this is a bad idea? (3, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709438)

i'm not talking about the religious nuts, i understand their point of view: they think a .xxx domain makes porn legitimate. as if not having a .xxx domain means POOF, all porn disappears. porn is a part of society, and some can argue it actually serves a valid purpose (harmless release of sexual frustrations). get used to it, (hypocritical) social conservatives, you have a better chance fighting the rising and falling of the tides. its not going away, ever

but i'm talking about the porn purveyors: why are they fighting this? it's not a ghettoization, its a domain. yes, it makes it easy to censor sexual content. and what's wrong with that? if i have some kids in my house, and i want to black hole all .xxx domains, i should be able to do that. if a nation wants to blackhole all .xxx domains at a national level meanwhile: ok, this nation is retarded. as if not having .xxx means they won't engage in idiotic censorship? you make it easier for them? do you see iran and china quaking in their boots because censorship is hard? get real: a committed censoring asshole is a committed censoring asshole, the issue of easy or hard to censor is an issue for people who want to block the domain for legitimate purposes (kids in the house), not an issue for those who will censor no matter what

and finally, there's the red herring of sexual content that shouldn't be grouped with porn, like sexual health. well if its sexual health, like how to put on a condom, its sexual health, end of discussion. its not pornography. yes, some assholes will try to group sexual health issues with porn. the existence of such assholes does not mean sexual health issues deserve to be with porn, just that there exists assholes in this world with harmful ideas about sexual health that you need to fight, and the existence or lack of existence of an .xxx domain does not change their existence or the need to fight them. in fact, let them make fools of themselves by trying to group sexual health topics with porn, and reveal to the thinking rational world what ignorant assholes they really are, bring their idiocy to the forefront

the REAL point is that pornography is not some GOTCHA that tries to sneak up on innocent teenagers and corrupt their souls, this is social conservative bullshit (and fails to understand human nature). clearly defining and delineating pornographic content simply underlines the most important point here: pornography is something that people choose to consume, and if some hypocritical social conservative asshole doesn't like that fact, or is ashamed of that fact, then don't click on an .xxx domain, end of story!

because no one is trying to trick you into recognizing that you have sexual urges

fly the new .xxx flag loud and proud. its simply a healthy recognition of the fact that we are sexual beings, and we are happy and comfortable making a space for this material on our internet. LACK OF recognition of the validity of porn is the REAL problem, lack of an .xxx domain is an act of misplaced shame, and that's the real motivation behind ignoring the issue, and denying porn its own domain

giving porn its own domain is sex positive, and good for society. really. every rational, self-aware human should celebrate this

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (5, Insightful)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709490)

Here are some points in reply:

-It is stupid to expect all porn to go to ".xxx".
-Therefore it doesn't make it easier to filter porn, it means your filters have to have one extra line for "block *.xxx". Technically, it is a little more work to block porn now than it was before.
-Who defines porn, anyway? What is it, exactly?
-The only reason it exists is to print money, and everyone is jealous that they can't do that

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (3, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709538)

> -It is stupid to expect all porn to go to ".xxx".

Why should pornographers want to hide themselves? Really.

They should want to make it as easy as possible for their customers to find them and there non-customers to avoid them.

It serves both their capitalistic needs and their political interests.

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (2, Informative)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709656)

> -It is stupid to expect all porn to go to ".xxx".

Why should pornographers want to hide themselves? Really.

It's not about pornographers hiding themselves. Actually many pornographers will set up an .xxx domain as alternative to their existing .com domain. What they will not do is to give up their existing .com domain, which their customers know, which are likely linked from somewhere, and which are not so easy to filter.

thank you for saying in 20 words (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709662)

what took me 200

please someone mod parent up

good points, except for one: (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709566)

"Who defines porn, anyway? What is it, exactly?"

this is an age old logical fallacy i'm sick of: "because grey areas exist, we can't say black isn't white"

porn exists, and is real. because there are grey areas doesn't mean we can't characterize something as porn

an analogy: abortion

at some point, its a just blob a woman is purging. at another point it is a human being you are murdering. ignoring for the moment the existence of the complete idiots who believe that when a sperm meets an egg you have a human life, or the complete idiots who think murdering a newborn is just late term abortion, there is a simple question for you: when exactly does a blob become a life?

of course, the ultimate answer is a complete grey area, and will always remain a grey area, forever. it is a completely subjective issue. and yet it requires definition, and is very important to define

that doesn't mean we should make early abortions illegal or make murdering newborns legal. what it means is that life is complicated, there are grey areas, and simply because grey areas exist and are complicated, you are not excused from making tough choices

so yes, there are grey areas: pornography or not? but just because that grey area exists, you are not allowed to chicken out and say "because there are grey areas, i will not take a stand and talk about what is pornography and what isn't." caging your cowardice in philosophical bloviating does not change the fact you are a coward

excusing yourself from the debate just makes you a cowardly asshole, standing on the sidelines does not mean you are morally superior. its just a cop out. take a fucking stand, whether on pornography, euthanasia, religious fundamentalism, free speech, abortion, etc.: grow a backbone, don't run and hide, and take a fucking stand on grey areas in this world

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (2, Insightful)

mustafap (452510) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709594)

I agree. After all, these guys will be setting the Evil Bit, so it will be easier to filter them out!

One caveat (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709706)

I agree entirely with everything you say. And I'm completely for the .xxx domain.

The thing that's coming up in my cynical fuzzy little brain is that it could be a pressure point by some groups to bully ISPs into banning the entire domain.

I'm imaging protests against AT&T by some religious groups wanting "their" local ISP to ban "indecent" material.

ISPs wanting to do what's "right" cave in and blocks everything from the .xxx domain and we're back to where we've started.

On the plus side, it'll make finding and blocking that material easier for individuals - at least for those sites that participate.

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709752)

The porn purveyors will have to keep their .com domains anyway to get around people filtering .xxx and because everyone already knows about their .com domain. Because of this, the .xxx is simply redundant.

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709766)

Just wanted to let you know that your lack of capitalized sentences was what made me decide to pass on reading your post. The capital letter helps me keep my place while reading, and more easily parse the high-level structure (letters, words, sentences, paragraphs). I'm curious as to the advantages you get by not capitalizing sentences.

Re:why do people think this is a bad idea? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709798)

"i'm talking about the porn purveyors: why are they fighting this? "

Because they've read some of the fine print on the proposal. ICM isn't going to be just a registrar; they want to be your new business partner, with authority to tell you how to run your business, and shut you off (i.e. revoke your domain name) if you don't play by their rules.

As a casual porn consumer, I'm more than a little concerned about what my local ISP will do when the fundies who run things around here start demanding that the ISP stop carrying .XXX. Will they block it? Or just charge extra for it (like the cable company does for Cinemax and the Playboy channel)?

Think of the children (2, Insightful)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709452)

Lawley says he expects to make $30m (£20m) a year in revenue by selling each .xxx site for $60, and pledges to donate $10 from each sale to child protection initiatives.

If he actually gives $6 million per year to child protection causes the universe will implode out of shock and amazement.

Also on children, are they supposing children will never stumble into a .xxx domain (or that .xxx can be blocked altogether), so now they're safe from porn? Because I'm sure that .xxx porn sites will never use pop-up loops or deceptive ads or auto-dialing trojans the way many .com porn sites have done forever. The new .xxx porn industry will be squeaky clean, with our children's welfare at heart!

Not to mention the whole thing won't have any damn effect unless you simultaneously force current .com, .net, and .org porn sites to re-register in .xxx and drop their old domains, which will not happen.

Furthermore, for the whole notion of giving adults an easy, consolidated place to access porn, let me give ICANN a big hint: whether it's porn, cracks, bomb making instructions, or whatever, the most obvious place to look for anything even vaguely taboo is always the one most flooded with scams, viruses, top lists, etc. which make the obvious places by far the most worthless places to look. I predict that absolutely all worthwhile porn will remain on .com sites for quite some time, and that .com sites will simply register the same domain registered under .xxx and redirect people back into the .com site.

Wget syntax? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709454)

What's the correct syntax for wget to retrieve an entire TLD?

wget -r *.xxx isn't working.

Re:Wget syntax? (4, Funny)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709626)

The shell is swallowing the *.

Try wget -r "*.xxx"

Re:Wget syntax? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709780)

Unless you actually have a file ending in .xxx, the shell will not swallow the *.
See the following (copy/pasted from a real bash session):

$ echo *.xxx
*.xxx
$ touch foo.xxx
$ echo *.xxx
foo.xxx
$ rm foo.xxx
$ echo *.xxx
*.xxx
$

ICANN approves a snuffix? (1)

stkris (1843186) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709472)

Wouldn't this snuffix soon be included in the firewall blocklists of corporations and not-so-open-minded states? And that would be bad for the xxx business so the sites would have to keep/create .com sites too.

Re:ICANN approves a snuffix? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709674)

Even without the filtering, giving up an well-established domain name isn't something you'd do without need. You'd break all links to it, all bookmarks to it, and people who know the old URL might miss the information about the new one.

$60 a year of which $10 to non-profit (2, Insightful)

Ziekheid (1427027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709498)

"Each domain registration will cost $60 a year, with $10 going to a nonprofit organization promoting “responsible business practices” for the industry." Beside this being overly expensive for a domain name the fact that they donate $10 per domain to a nonprofit organisation is just wrong. Who are they to decide for us that this should be done? Aren't they supposed to be some sort of objective organisation when it comes to this?

Re:$60 a year of which $10 to non-profit (1)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709544)

the fact that they donate $10 per domain to a nonprofit organisation is just wrong...Who are they to decide for us that this should be done?

They're not deciding anything "for us". They're making a public decision to donate some of their profit, purely private money, to a certain cause. You make it sound like they're breaking into your house, stealing your piggy bank, and sending it to UNICEF. If you don't agree with mandatory "donations" to charities (eg: your employer appointing a designated United Way coordinator who literally harasses you at work to donate money) I hear you and agree with you, but that is not what's happening here.

Wonderful! (1)

chucklebutte (921447) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709506)

So youporn.com will be the next ebay or next huge social networking site since .com wont be porn anymore? What will we do with all our porn .coms now? since they will roll over to .xxx?

I am so buying whitehouse.com!!!

Yet another TLD (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709518)

*yawn*

There are too many now, adding even more just dilutes things further and makes it harder for the consumer.

Re:Yet another TLD (1)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709686)

There are too many now, adding even more just dilutes things further and makes it harder for the consumer.

On the contrary: essentially the domain part of URL's is just a namespace, a 'random' string of Unicode characters. With the TLD part of that namespace having just a 'few' fixed values, that is: using just a small part of all possible codes.

More TLD's means that on average, that namespace is better utilized. So that on average, shorter domain names can be used to select a specific domain (the extreme being to do away with the concept of TLD's, and allow registration of any domain name). And .xxx would (in general) make it easier to predict the nature of a site's contents, before actually hitting it. Technical limitations aside, that's a win-win from user's point of view.

and makes it harder for the consumer (2, Funny)

XanC (644172) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709692)

That's what she said!

Usenet had it right...ish. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709776)

Agreed. But the whole DNS system in general is just backwards and retarded in every way.

protocol://planet[optional].continentCode.countryCode.websiteType.websiteName.subDomainN/directories/
websiteType would take over the role of TLDs designed for countries, museum, info, biz, xxx, etc.
This just makes more sense.
Planet will be optional since we don't really have much of a consumer network in space yet, nor do we live on another planet.
In fact, you could probably even make continent and country optional if you knew for sure that your site was located in your country.
continentCode and countryCode can be set to a placeholder that describes a global-scale company. In that case, continent can be ommited (for example below, assume "glb")
But i just placed that in there to show how it would expand to the future.
Examples:
http://glb.email.google/?usualRandomCrapHere
http://glb.search.google.images/?usualRandomCrapHere
http://glb.news.slashdot.tech/story/10/06/27/151241/ICANN-Approvesnobr-wbrnobrxxx-Suffix-For-Porn-Websites
http://uk.gov.number10/ (for those outside UK, http://www.number10.gov.uk/)
http://us.gov.change/, http://us.gov.whitehouse/
It just makes so much more sense.
And damn it, if people don't want to conform to the standards, just throw them all under a collective "everything goes" chunk of the system... http://goatse.herp.derp.herpderp.4chan/b/
Oh come on, how could i resist?

Right now, DNS isn't even endian when it comes to importance of the separate parts, domains can be more important, sub-domains could be more important, hell, directories could be the important part. It is an AWFUL mess.
I find it shocking that we have suffered this mess for such a long time.

Now there will never be a chance to fix this mess, nobody is going to want to take the responsibility of fixing it, and nobody will agree to it.
And Usenet is dying a slow, but very sure death.

XXXX (1)

Fishbulb (32296) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709542)

One month from now:
"But our site is so hot it blows all those tame triple-x sites out of the water! We need .xxxx! Hell yeah!"

well its not online yet (1)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709572)

just ran a quick dig in the terminal on my mac... captured the results with wireshark and put the evidence on cloudshark.org:

.com working [cloudshark.org]

.xxx not working [cloudshark.org]

To be fair... (4, Insightful)

arielCo (995647) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709598)

Pornography/erotica is a genre. So are Action, Romance, Documentary, etc. Is there a similar push to create the likes of .action, .docu, and .love ?

And of course, the argument that certain content is especially sensitive hasn't been wielded to lobby for creating .hate, .religion or .violence

Re:To be fair... (2, Funny)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709804)

You forgot the most important TLD: .evil
Probably one of the requirements of this domain is that any servers set the evil bit.

Of course, there's always... (2, Informative)

allcaps (1617499) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709634)

There's always a way around domain name filters. http://1113982824/ [1113982824]

Not just for porn (1)

lalena (1221394) | more than 4 years ago | (#32709664)

businesses that wanted to prevent their names from being hijacked. Mr. Lawley said businesses could ensure that their names were not misused in the dot-xxx world by paying a one-time fee, to be set from $50 to $250.

Sounds like trying to extort money from honest businesses. Forcing Amazon to spend money for Amazon.xxx

The only way it works (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32709700)

You'd have to ban porn sites from the .com suffix. That obviously opens the can of worms about internet censorship and constitutes pornographic. The joke is if you are a radical Muslim virtually everything is porn including Christianity. Part of the world is against anything sexual and other parts don't see the issue. The other part of which the US is a part can't make up it's mind. I don't think the grey area is as large as most claim it is and most have a clear idea of what would fall under porn sites. It's the conservatives that tend to think anything that shows too much neck or ankle is pornographic. It's too bad the porn operators wouldn't agree to shift everything to the .XXX suffix. I think being able to easily block the sites would take a lot of pressure off them. Yes they loose some business but they would also save a lot of trouble and expensive fighting the outright banning of it. If everyone agreed to play in their own sand boxes we'd have a lot more peace and general freedom. The conservatives don't have to be tempted by exposed ankles and everyone else that isn't insane can enjoy themselves and relax a bit.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>