YNOT – Despite any other merits of its application, domain-registrar hopeful ICM Registry LLC “never satisfied the sponsorship requirements and criteria for a sponsored Top-Level Domain.” Therefore, the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers should not be grant ICM control of the proposed dot-XXX sTLD, an adult industry trade association told ICANN on Thursday.In tandem with submitting formal public comments to the internet overseer, the Free Speech Coalition also issued a call to arms to members of the adult entertainment industry: Make your opposition to dot-XXX clear, or live with the consequences.
“It is critical that everyone in the industry not only submit a comment, but also answer the question ICANN is asking: Which option [of three offered by ICANN’s board in a process report dated March 26] should ICANN select in moving forward in the consideration process?” FSC Executive Director Diane Duke exhorted.
The FSC’s position statement and call to action occurred at about the halfway point in a 45-day dot-XXX public-comment period that will continue through May 10. ICANN seeks input about the controversial domain intended to house legal pornographic content before the organization issues a decision on the sTLD’s fate.
The dot-XXX question has bedeviled the web’s governing body since 2001. In 2005, after much discussion, ICANN’s board of directors approved the sTLD. During contract negotiations with ICM in 2007, the same group rejected dot-XXX and permanently washed its collective hands of the matter … or so ICANN thought.
In February 2010, an international arbitration tribunal, convened at ICM’s request, reprimanded ICANN for violating its own bylaws when it withdrew approval from dot-XXX. The panel also strongly advised ICANN to rectify the error. Shortly thereafter, ICM President Stuart Lawley suggested his company might take even more severe legal action if ICANN continues to back away from its 2005 approval. Lawley backed up his company’s position March 28 with a letter to ICANN Chief Executive Officer Rod Beckstrom in which Lawley called ICANN’s treatment of ICM “discriminatory, unfair and [in] bad faith.” He repeated ICM’s willingness to take the matter to court.
The protracted dispute has left ICANN between the proverbial rock and a hard place: The organization almost certainly faces censure from governments, social conservatives and the adult entertainment industry if it breathes life into dot-XXX now, but failing to do so may leave ICANN at odds with the international cyberspace legal system.
In its public comments, FSC pointed out that ICANN was well within its rights to kill the dot-XXX proposal in 2007 after the sTLD’s lack of support in the supposedly “sponsoring community” [adult entertainment] was established. Moreover, FSC noted, ICANN’s bylaws obligate the organization to reach the conclusion the board ultimately delivered.
“We have studied the issue thoroughly, and it is clear to us that the best option is to accept the dissenting opinion from the Feb. 19, 2010 Declaration of the Internal Review Panel [convened by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution] and deny ICM’s application,” Duke said.
Interested parties may access FSC’s call-to-action process and read the association’s public comment at FreeSpeechCoalition.com.
Members of the public may voice their opinions directly to ICANN by visiting the formal Public Comment Forum Box. Comments may be viewed here.
