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

From: Declan McCullagh (declan@private)
Date: Tue Mar 30 2004 - 21:48:53 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "[Politech] Senate Maj. Leader Frist condemns EU "intolerable" Microsoft decision"

    -------- 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@private>
    Organization: http://www.templetons.com/brad
    To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private>
    References: <405FE751.6040201@private>
    
    
    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@private>
    References: <405FE751.6040201@private>
    
    [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/)
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Mar 30 2004 - 22:36:04 PST