Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN To Approve .xxx Domain

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

This notion of preventing xxx is exactly what we are dealing with on the GA.
 
It is not up to xxx to come up with curative or extras to make them palatable 
and worthy.  They do not have to justify their speech to anyone.  Making them 
is wrongful.
 
The process that ICANN followed is what is on trial here.  Just like the 
banning of Joe from the GA --- absolutely childish and without the 
sophistication of a Highschool Student Body Association respect for rules and 
law.  It is just amazing how time and time again they just ignore general 
principals of corporate and Internet Governance. Are they above the law and 
running a quasi government of Men and not Law?  What they do does not scare me 
nearly as much as that they can do it.

--- On Fri, 5/7/10, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN To Approve .xxx Domain
To: "Matthew Pemble" <matthew@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" 
<ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, May 7, 2010, 12:45 PM



#yiv185599222 {font-family:Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, 
sans-serif;font-size:10pt;font-family:arial, 
sans-serif;background-color:#ffffff;color:black;}#yiv185599222 p{margin:0px;}

Matthew and all,
 
  Thank you.  I don't worry about 'principle' as opposed to 'fairness' as 
fairness is or should be
included as part of any sound principal.  If not, or the perception of not, the 
courts will test that 
at some point.  And yes saddly porn is with us regardless, but need not or 
should not be further 
propagated or enabled in any way.  .XXX would likely/potentially do that.  
Still the 1st amendment
and similar legally similar laws in other jurisdictions may be a formadable 
argument or basis for
same in favor of .XXX that may not be with respect to 'principal', abridged. 
 
  The idea that .XXX would provide for an opertunity to filter porn more easily 
doesn't
hold up well either as I earlier briefly and many times before pointed out, and 
in fact
'May' cause more confusion and misdirection.  Compartmentizing online bahavior
via the DNS is simply a bad idea as the risk vs reward is too high and 
represents
a gamble that once taken is difficult if not practically possible to reverse.  
The
DNS is not the vehicle by which to accomplish such, if such is even actually
accomplishable.  Other means are avaliable and work to a degree, and are far
easier to modify as the need arises or is percieved/necessary.   A comprehensive
approach/means is/are seemingly required here excluding using TLD creation
policy.
 
  But we have already been down this/these debate/argument paths haven't 
we?



-----Original Message----- 
From: Matthew Pemble 
Sent: May 6, 2010 6:20 PM 
To: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" 
Subject: Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN To Approve .xxx Domain 

Folks,


On 6 May 2010 20:23, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


All,

 If this bit of news wasn't so tragic is would be humorous.
Frankly a better argument in favor of .xxx would be based
on discrimination or repressing expression/speach.  I personally
am against promoting in any way, porn on the Internet.  .xxx
will not help one bit in supressing porn on the Internet as
ccTLD's and other gTLD's such as .biz, .info, .net, .com, .org,
all already have a huge number of domain names registered that
provide various types of porn.  so parents simply blocking .xxx
domain names will do little, if anything at all in preventing
their children from viewing porn.  Yet I can also see how ICANN
is kind of "up against it" as it were, with this delema. Dammed
if they approve it, and dammed if they don't.  But will $$ trump
principal or which principal has superior consideration?


I agree with Jeff's argument entirely - I just wonder about 'principle' as 
opposed to 'fairness' and Hugh's 'prurience' - porn is with us, regardless.

M. 



-- 
Matthew Pemble
Technical Director, Idrach Ltd

Mobile: +44 (0) 7595 652175
Office: + 44 (0) 1324 820690

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders and growing, 
strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827