[COLOR=red]This is part one of “What’s Wrong with Dot-xxx,” a five-part series outlining the Free Speech Coalition’s assessment of the proposed adult-entertainment-specific sponsored Top Level Domain.[/COLOR]
By Diane Duke
YNOT – The adult entertainment industry certainly is no stranger to the use of “child protection” as a pretext to impose unnecessary regulations while engaging in direct attacks on the civil liberties of its members. But governments are not the only serial abusers of this hypocritical tactic. ICM Registry also uses “child protection” as one of the fundamental reasons why a dot-xxx sTLD is needed. The registrar-hopeful even used the specter of child protection in its application [to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers] when it made the vague promise to “support the development of tools and programs to protect vulnerable members of the community.”
ICM also promised ICANN’s Government Advisory Committee that it “will donate $10 per year per registration to fund [the International Foundation for Online Responsibility’s] policy development activities and to provide financial support for the work of online safety organizations, child pornography hotlines, and to sponsor the development of tools and technology to promote child safety and fight child pornography.”
There’s a problem with ICM’s math, however. This is the same $10 per year per registration that ICM’s Stuart Lawley described — and continues to describe — quite differently to the adult entertainment community. As recently as July 2010, for example, he posted the following statement to an online forum serving the adult industry:
[QUOTE]
IFFOR will be tasked with setting the policies for .XXX. Details can be found on www.iffor.org. This is an independent entity from ICM and will be funded through a contract with ICM to the tune of $10 per registration per year. We estimate now that we will launch with between 300,000-500,000 names, so that would translate to $3-$5 million a year for IFFOR.
With annual operating costs of approximately $500,000 per year, substantial monies will be available for IFFOR to donate, sponsor and fund whatever initiatives it feels appropriate. We envisage a range of initiatives being considered, including but not limited to: health and safety of Adult Industry workers, legal challenges facing the industry such as 2257, piracy, counterfeiting, onerous legislation etc., labeling initiatives, combating child abuse, parental awareness etc.
[/QUOTE]
But ICM’s use of “child protection” is even more cynically duplicitous than being fuzzy with how money will be spent. In telling GAC that it will use the $10 per year per registration for child protection, ICM has insinuated that the adult entertainment community needs ICM to save the internet from the child predators that are the adult entertainment community. This is not only an insult to our industry, but also a lie. The adult entertainment industry always has supported efforts to improve child internet safety, especially greater parental involvement in filtering and supervising their children’s use of the internet.
Ironically, though, several child advocacy groups believe that a dot-xxx sTLD could do more harm than good. One such group is SafeKids.com, one of the oldest and most respected internet safety websites. Its creator, Larry Magid, wrote, “As an internet safety advocate, my concern about .XXX is that it could give parents a false sense of security. True, it would be very easy to configure browsers or filters to automatically block sites designated as .XXX, but since this is a voluntary program, there would be nothing to stop adult site operators from also using .com. It would be like setting up a red-light district in a community while also allowing adult entertainment establishments to operate in residential shopping centers.”
He concluded, “I’m still not convinced that .XXX is in the best interest of child protection….”
The adult entertainment industry also knows full well that child pornographers and those who peddle adult material to minors would simply avoid dot-xxx and IFFOR, just as they now avoid the Free Speech Coalition and its members and what currently is the legitimate adult entertainment industry. If ICM truly wants to help children, it would develop a dot-kids TLD, which it actually dropped years ago in favor of the presumably more profitable scheme to leech off the adult entertainment industry.
ICM Chief Executive Officer Lawley promised ICANN that IFFOR will use $10 per registration for child protection. He promised the adult entertainment community that the very same money will be used to protect the industry. But it is not his money; it is your money, and it is a fraction of the amount ICM will try to suck out of you — all in the name of “child protection.”
Let me repeat: ICM and Stuart Lawley want to use your money to perpetuate the myth that child pornography is connected to the adult entertainment industry. But the industry already knows the myth is not true. In fact, we know it’s…BULLSHIT.
Throughout March, ICANN’s board of directors plans to discuss some final issues with the internet regulatory body’s Governmental Advisory Committee before determining the next step in dot-xxx’s destiny. It is imperative that adult industry professionals understand the ramifications of this complex issue. In this five-part series, Free Speech Coalition Executive Director Diane Duke points out some of the adult industry trade association’s objections to dot-xxx and explains why the organization feels dot-xxx may be dangerous and detrimental to the adult entertainment industry.
