[ga] Re: [Politech] Two replies to proposal for .xxx top-level domain [fs]

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brad, Declan and all,

  It go's to show  you that cheap thrills comes high!  And that is and
oxymoron,
but yet sometimes true none the less.  In any event at least Esther Dyson
will
be able to find whom and where her some time ago lude picture is being
distributed...  >;)  I however and not all that sure this is to her great
advantage.  Hence leaving me to guess that ICANN will not be highly
motivated to "Grant" .xxx as a new chartered TLD...

 And so the never ending saga continues...

Declan McCullagh wrote:

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Politech] Weekly column: the battle over .xxx [fs]
> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:12:52 -0800
> From: Brad Templeton <btm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Organization: http://www.templetons.com/brad
> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@xxxxxxxx>
> References: <405FE751.6040201@xxxxxxxx>
>
> You already make most of the points about the dangers of a .xxx
> domain, but there is one you missed.
>
> $60 to act as a registry for a domain?  SIXTY DOLLARS?  Especially
> one people feel pressure to be in?
>
> Verisign is now what, $6 right now, and that's considered a major
> rip-off for just storing your name in a database and serving it up
> from time to time.
>
> As I like to point out, our friends at Amazon.com, for $6, will
> store your name, lots of other data, your wishlist and a record of your
> preferences, recommend books to you and let you write reviews in
> their database.
>
> And oh yeah, they will also send you a book with a $6 cover price.
>
> You've already seen my thoughts on the errors of creating generic
> top level domains, granting artificial monopolies on generic terms
> when those should not be owned, but this price really takes the
> cake.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Politech] Weekly column: the battle over .xxx [fs]
> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:15:13 -0500
> From: Doug Carroll
> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@xxxxxxxx>
> References: <405FE751.6040201@xxxxxxxx>
>
> [please remove my email if forwarded]
>
> This advocates the partition of the net into 'clean' and 'dirty' as if it
> were a virtue. It could lead to censoring of legal content by TLD.
>
> There is nothing wrong now with the mix of content in the .com and
> .net TLD's - except, nobody can profit from a .xxx TLD registry.
>
> Equivalent ideas might be, separate TLD's for religious content,
> political content, etc. Outrageous.
>
> Why would legal content of any kind be a target for partition?
>
> When govt suggested this, it was rightly viewed as a prelude
> to censorship. First distinguish, then separate, then censor.
>
> There is only one kind of protected free speech, all of it.
> _______________________________________________
> Politech mailing list
> Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
> Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"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.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827