The Committee on Tools and Strategies for Protecting Kids from Pornography and Their Applicability to Other Inappropriate Internet Content

March 7, 2001

The purpose of this submission is to acquaint the National Research Council (NRC) and other interested parties with our proposal to minimize children's exposure to harmful and inappropriate material on the Internet.

We have a long-standing and very direct interest in this problem. Our contribution, which includes both tools and strategies as defined by the NRC, is in essence the business model we recently submitted to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the international organization that oversees the technical administration of the Internet, in hopes of obtaining a new, adult-content, top-level domain (TLD) known as .xxx, which would serve as an alternative to established TLDs such as .net, .com and .org.

Other white papers will no doubt speak to measures that could or ought to be pursued, but our proposal is more specific. Its implementation hinges upon the creation of the .xxx domain. With that in mind, we should begin by introducing ourselves, and outlining our activities to date.

ICM Registry Inc. (ICMR) is a Delaware company, based in Toronto, Canada. It commenced operations in 1996, with the primary aim of pursuing the .xxx domain. Since that time, we have participated in many hearings conducted by various bodies, among them the COPA (Child Online Protection Act) Commission, several of whose key recommendations we have incorporated into our plans.

Throughout our existence, we have attempted to consult with, and build consensus among, a wide range of stakeholders both in the United States and abroad. Our abiding goal has been to find common ground whenever possible, and to reconcile often divergent views. Our proposals therefore reflect the input of Internet businesses, infrastructure companies and service-providers; intellectual property and trademark-rights organizations; prominent academics; children's advocacy groups; several COPA commissioners; First Amendment rights organizations; law-enforcement agencies; Internet-user communities; and major adult-content providers.

To be clear, we ourselves do not and will not produce or manage such content. Our role is purely technical. We will function exclusively as a registry or central clearinghouse for .xxx domain registrations, and as an information intermediary. We will, however, create, with the participation of the content-providers, a categorization process that will enhance the effectiveness and accuracy of both new and traditional content-management tools such as rating and labeling services. This will enable individual Internet users to better, more easily and more directly manage the content they choose to receive or reject, as the case may be.

In our view, the Internet's greatest attribute is that it has encouraged the unfettered flow of information. Enormous good has come of this, but we are convinced that adults' freedom of choice must be balanced by children's well being. In short, adults have every right to select whatever legal content they wish, but parents have an equal right to ensure their children are not placed at risk. Nonetheless, we do not see ourselves or any other component of the Internet industry as a censor or arbiter. Our role is to facilitate access to adult-content material by those who want it and are entitled to find it, better enabling both new and traditional content-management tools like rating services to operate effectively. Meanwhile, all Internet users will have the information they need to make sure, if that is their wish, that such material does not intrude where it is unwelcome or may inflict harm. In short, adults have every right to choose what they want to see, but parents have an equal right to ensure their children are not placed at risk.

We should explain at this point that our original hope, and the basis of our initial application to ICANN in October 2000, was to obtain not one but two new TLDs -- .xxx and .kids. The latter, .kids, would have offered a “green light,” area on the Internet, functioning as a haven for appropriate information and entertainment, a secure environment to which parents could safely and confidently direct their children. It would have, in effect, implied that the majority of material it contained would be suitable for minors, and would have operated on a non- profit basis.

Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that .kids presented significant problems that were difficult to unravel. It raised the highest expectations, which would have proved very difficult to satisfy. Given an infinity of cultural variables, it is near impossible to define what is acceptable to a child on an international basis. Even in North America, the most benevolent theories seemed apt to unravel in practice. For example, would material that included any reference to sex education, or to evolution versus creationism, be deemed appropriate for all children in each and every state? Such concerns, coupled with the daunting prospect of monitoring the content of perhaps 100,000 sites worldwide, suggest that a blanket assurance could not plausibly be given. We therefore withdrew our application for the .kids TLD, and chose instead to create the Online Protection Organization (OPO), a non-profit entity that will be sponsored, as we shall explain, by monies generated by the .xxx registry.

The .xxx domain itself is self-explanatory. It will carry adult-oriented content. It represents a clear and unmistakable “red light” area on the Net, alerting everyone everywhere to the content they can expect. It will satisfy those who wish to avail themselves of this content, while allowing parents to easily reach an informed decision as to how much of it should remain unseen. ICMR, as its operator, will not directly manage, control, restrict or organize this content. Rather, we conceived .xxx on the premise that the adult-content industry should accept a measure of responsibility for what it does.

As stated earlier, we are first and foremost a registry. Upon obtaining the .xxx TLD, we will register second-level domain names to adult-content providers and maintain a master directory of these registrations. When adult registrants register their .xxx domain with us, they will not be required to abandon their other names and will be at complete liberty to keep on doing business in their .com, .net and .org Web addresses. We will, however, require that they categorize in precise detail the material they propose to distribute across their .xxx Web address. The result will be rather like a virtual yellow pages. The categorization system will enable the adult-content industry to better allow Internet users to be doubly sure of what they're getting into, and facilitate the use of the many rating and content-management tools that prevent children from accessing certain material.

In addition, we also envision a wide range of non-profit programs, funded largely by ICM Registry from the revenues generated by .xxx registrations. These programs include sex-education initiatives and the provision of much-needed information resources and attempts to develop even more reliable means by which children can be shielded from harmful content. We shall expand on many of these points later in this submission.

For the moment, as many readers may be aware, we were not selected this past November by ICANN as one of the initial seven proof-of-concept TLDs (so-called because they represent the first expansion beyond .com, .net, and org). However, we are heartened by the fact that our proposal was not rejected. Indeed, it met all of ICANN's financial and technical criteria. Despite ICANN's decision regarding .xxx, we continue to support the ICANN process, as we have done all along. Further to this end, we have filed a Reconsideration Request, which outlines our many concerns arising from ICANN's decision. We believe recent enhancements to our proposal, which will soon be publicly released, will significantly improve our chances of success in the next round, and we remain convinced that we are by far the most suitable operator of a test-bed, adult-content TLD. Indeed, we are the only applicant exclusively pursuing such a TLD. It may sound immodest, but it is accurate to say that we are the only game in town.

We should point out that there is widespread, bipartisan political support for an adult-content TLD. Senator Joseph Lieberman stated that this idea, which would in effect establish a virtual red-light district ... has a lot of merit, for rather than constricting the Net's open architecture, it would capitalize on it to effectively shield children from pornography, and it would do so without encroaching on the rights of adults to have access to protected speech; [1] Non-governmental bodies are also in favor. Bruce Watson, president of the Internet watchdog group Enough is Enough, said that his organization “agree[s] with the concept of an adult domain, which would make the content easier to isolate.” [2]

More recently, at hearings conducted by the House Energy and Commerce telecommunications subcommittee in February 2001, several members -- both Democratic and Republican -- not only voiced their support for an adult-content TLD but questioned ICANN's decision to not include .xxx as a proof-of-concept TLD.

Although the .xxx concept entails an element of controversy, we believe its hour has come. If we could remove from the equation the strong emotions aroused by the mention of adult content, the founding premise of .xxx is very similar to .museum, a new TLD that was recently approved by ICANN. The two domains would function in much the same way. To register in .museum, one need only be a museum proprietor and describe one's operations honestly, thus allowing consumers to decide whether or not to learn more. Statistics are often of dubious value, and projections are almost certain to be off-target in some particular. Nowhere is this more evident than in the adult-content industry, where facts, resources and figures are difficult to obtain -- a situation that our proposal will help to rectify. The inescapable conclusions to be drawn from the data available, however, are that adult-content material is here to stay because a great many people want it, and that there will be a great deal more of it in the years ahead. Mediametrix estimated that in 2000, the adult-content industry accounted for more than 30% of all Internet traffic worldwide, and for the majority of spending for online content including subscription and pay-on-demand services (source: Private). The North American online adult-content industry alone will grow from somewhere between a probably conservative US$1-billion in 2000 to over US$3.12-billion by 2003 (source: Forrester and Dataquest).

By that time, the number of adult webmasters -firms that operate at least one adult-content site -- will likely rise from the current figure of between 30,000 and 45,000 to more than 110,000 (Source: Private, iGallery and management estimates). We believe the higher present-day figure to be the more accurate. These webmasters range from very large concerns (one, iGallery one of the top ten online adult content providers, has registered approximately 1,500 second-level domains) to small, home-based operations (registering on average between 9-18 domains each). At the moment, about 25 webmasters dominate the field, with the lion's share controlled by the top ten. By 2003, according to data from Forrester and NSI Registry, our estimates suggest these webmasters, and others who will emerge in the meantime, will likely have registered an astonishing 2.1 million domain names worldwide, up from approximately 640,000 in 2000.

On the basis of continuing meetings with many of the top-ten adult-content providers, we believe that, when we obtain the .xxx domain, the majority of the industry as it now stands will choose to join us. We also believe that during the first four years of the .xxx domain's operation, we can capture about a million registrations and categorize the majority of all the adult-content Web sites on the Internet.

These content-providers wish to join with us for a variety of reasons. We hesitate to speak for them, but the fact is that they find it difficult to speak for themselves. They have not, for example, banded together to voice their concerns about the recent filtering initiatives initiated by Congress or address escalating credit card charge-back problems. There is a reason for this. Despite their remarkable commercial success, they feel besieged. Many are plagued by litigation; most find it difficult to effectively lobby for their cause. They view with alarm the prospect of changes in the political climate, and find few sympathetic audiences in high places. To put it bluntly, few elected representatives wish to be seen as soft on pornography. The adult-content providers are plagued by factionalism and acrimony; some actively dislike or distrust the others. About the only thing they share is a detestation of child pornography. In the words of AVN Online journalist Tom Hymes, “thousands of responsible adult webmasters, often parents themselves, who try to earn their living by the legitimate display of sexual material ... [are] vehemently opposed to the proliferation of child pornography on the Internet, considering it not only inherently heinous, but also a serious threat to the survival of the industry as a whole.” [3] They wish to be left in peace to provide -- within the law -- a profitable service to adults who actively exercise their freedom of choice.

Our solution offers responsible adult webmasters a large and inclusive tent. Once the major players have reached agreement -- a development that awaits our obtaining the .xxx domain -- a degree of order will immediately be brought to what is, at present, a chaotic and fragmented situation, one that, as we have shown, seems certain to grow more chaotic and fragmented with the passage of time unless something is done at once.

But that degree of order will not and cannot be imposed. Recently, ICM Registry retained Jonathan Silverstein, former President of Cybererotica; one of the Internet's top-five adult-content providers, to build consensus support within the adult industry. Mr. Silverstein reinforced this concern that “any attempt to limit free speech will inspire an eruption of First Amendment challenges.” Supreme Court Justice O'Connor, while noting that “the creation of 'adult zones' is by no means a novel concept “and that” states have long denied minors access to certain establishments frequented by adults,” pointed out in the course of her partial dissent to the court's rejection of the Communication Decency Act that, while the court had previously sustained such zoning laws, it did so “only if they respected the First Amendment rights of both adults and minors.” [4] That is to say, a zoning law could be held valid only if adult access was not unduly restricted, and minors themselves had no First Amendment rights to read or view the banned material in question.

Alan B. Davidson of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) has stated his concern regarding “a class of gatekeepers” that might be created along with the creation of new domain names. He lauded the “innovation and expression” that had resulted from easy access to the Internet, stressed his support for “a diversity of both open and restricted TLDs” and pledged to “monitor the impact of restricted domains on speech.” [5]

This is why we have no wish to be regulators, zone-enforcers, gatekeepers or policemen: it wouldn't work. As for ICANN, it has, in our view, no mandate to be in the business of regulating, organizing or legislating content. Nor does Congress, in its heart of hearts, wish to have endless hearings at which it must go over the same old, familiar ground one-on-one with adult-content providers. Nor does the broader Internet community want to be involved in, or to monitor the distribution of, adult-content material.

Under our plan, the domain-name system itself functions as a content-categorization and label-distribution system, enabling existing and future content-management technology to become significantly more effective. As a result, the end-user is clearly aware that he or she is connected to an adult-content site. At the moment, hundreds of thousands of adult-content sites operate across the Internet. Existing generic domain names (.com et cetera) make it nearly impossible to identify adult content in advance, resulting in confusion and annoyance on the part of Internet users. Nothing is more galling than to stumble unawares into such a site. But, because every adult-content provider already does business as dot- something, a search can produce unfortunate results. Horror stories abound, and they aren't all urban legends; you -- or, even worse, your child -- can in fact look for information on horses and wind up with bestiality. But the .xxx designation tells it like it is. It is very difficult to misinterpret .xxx -- you access it for a specific purpose, with a clear picture, at least in general terms, of what you're going to see. It is instantly and internationally recognized. It is also easy to turn off in whole or part.

ICM Registry has also begun to develop an extensive directory of adult-content Web addresses with the support of leading adult-content Webmasters and the broader Internet community. Under our enhanced ICANN submission, ICM Registry has proposed to support the development and implementation of a process under which the majority of existing adult-content domain registrations could be categorized. This process is called third-level .xxx domain forwarding. If, for instance, the adult-content webmaster has the Web site “nude.com,” ICM Registry would create the domain “nude.com.xxx” and forward that URL back to the nude.com address. This free domain space has the potential to both drive new traffic and identify the site as potentially containing adult-oriented content. Webmasters mistakenly given this third-level .xxx domain will have the opportunity to contact us and have it deleted at no expense. These invisible labels have the potential to rapidly categorize the majority of adult Web sites on the Internet. Adult-content webmasters would have the choice to modify the label to best represent the type of content they are distributing or leave it uncategorized. In addition to our continued work to refine this strategy, ICM Registry has begun to develop technology to make it possible for this categorization information to be both supported and distributed in the domain-name records themselves. Additional information about this system; called DNSII metadata using domain name server records (MetaDNS), can be provided upon request.

Why is it in the adult-content providers' best interests to come into the.xxx tent? First, they do so voluntarily. The migration of adult-content sites into the .xxx domain should not and will not need to be enforced by anyone. Content-providers who operate a site elsewhere need not relinquish it when they obtain an .xxx registration. They might be understandably loathe to do so, having paid money for the original location. But if they can be assured of doing more business in the .xxx domain, where consumers internationally can find them with greater ease, resulting in greater business, they might choose to put their emphasis there. If so, that is their right and their decision alone.

Once in .xxx, they might also be able to take advantage of the “incentives” alluded to by Congressman Cox and other prominent political representatives. These incentives include the concept known as affirmative defense -- in this particular case, the idea that by securing an .xxx registration and voluntarily agreeing to abide by certain rules and regulations that we shall come to in a moment, adult Webmasters could potentially avoid litigation by arguing they had taken reasonable, effective and appropriate actions, as defined by the Communications Decency Act, that served to inform adult Internet users of a domain's true nature and to assist parents in limiting access by their children.

Such incentives, of course, also await the creation of the .xxx domain. For the moment, we repeat that our proposal does not in any way represent a first step on the so-called slippery slope that some maintain -- quite wrongly -would lead to mandatory location in the .xxx domain. Rather, it offers the adult-content industry a home, rather than an uneasy roost in the hinterlands, where there are no incentives and no support, merely the shadowy though ever-present possibility of arbitrary governmental or regulatory actions in the future, not only in North America but around the world.

Our goal is to introduce a categorization system that (as stated) is compatible with the internationally established- and approved Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS)

[6] rating technology. Such a system enables the development of the next generation of content- management technologies and ratings services, including the possibility of industry-led services similar to the one employed by the Motion Picture Association of America, and it was among the COPA Commission's recommendations. Under it, all material in the .xxx domain will be voluntarily self-categorized by the content-producers. All webmasters will be motivated to describe in detail the content of their sites in terms of such broad and obvious categories as nudity, sexual activity, language and violence, and then proceed to offer greater detail. They will be asked to specify the nature of such content -- whether it is video, audio, interactive or a combination of text and images. These responses will be encoded onto every.xxx and the majority of non-.xxx sites, where they can be used by a parent's Web browser. In the simplest terms, we are informing the world what each.xxx site has to offer, sight unseen -- distributing relevant information that can be put to use as the consumer chooses.

By providing us with this information, by means of a process in which they have participated and in a format that they have helped us to determine, Webmasters both promote themselves to an adult-only niche market and take advantage of two levels of protection. First, as stated, is that afforded by the.xxx designation itself. Second is the fact that they have given adults ample opportunity to put this information to use by configuring their home Internet browser. If parents don't want their children to see .xxx, they can simply turn it off, as they would with a television v-chip. But if they themselves wish to see some portion of it, they know exactly what they'll find on a given site, and can easily avoid what they find offensive. Plainly, this demands that parents invest the effort to put this information to use in keeping with their own values. But that, in our view, is exactly as it should be -- the final responsibility rests with the parents.

As for the adult-content providers, we repeat our belief -- based on continuing and in-depth negotiations -- that the great majority are prepared to assume a greater measure of responsibility. There are, of course, still areas of dissent rather than total unanimity- not surprisingly, since .xxx does not yet exist. When it does, we have every expectation that an even greater consensus can be achieved.

One potential advantage of securing an .xxx registration -- the notion of affirmative defense -- has already been mentioned. Other advantages, of securing a .xxx registration might include further protection from litigation, support from credit-card companies, which could reduce their costs of credit-card charge-backs, and so forth not withstanding incentives mentioned by regulatory authorities at the last House Energy and Commerce telecommunications subcommittee meeting. But to warrant advantages, the adult-content providers must demonstrate a willingness to be proactive and responsive to the concerns of the broader Internet community. We therefore have proposed an industry-led Policy Advisory Board. Although its primary objective would be to deal with domain-related disputes, it could also address online adult-content business practices, as well as support a consensus-based response to concerns raised by consumers, academics, public-interest groups and the broader Internet community. The Policy Advisory Board's activities would be open and transparent, and it would not have the ability to restrict the free distribution of content. It would, however, along with related committees and working groups, be in a position to recommend a consensus-based framework for the development of strategies and guidelines, and to specify courses of action to be pursued. This independent organization, might then be able to explore a code of conduct pertaining to unsolicited e-mail, chatrooms, newsgroups and instant messaging. It would certainly press for the introduction of more reliable age-verification technology.

In addition, our proposal includes several important, non-profit initiatives. The Online Protection Organization (OPO), funded primarily by ICMR, will be in the forefront of these activities. We have proposed that it will include representatives from the Internet's business, technical, academic and user communities. It will sponsor efforts to develop a number of online resources that will inform parents what safeguards and technologies are available to aid their efforts to protect their kids. We foresee that it will devise and implement a wide-ranging educational program, operative both on the Internet and throughout other media. In time, we hope to provide a primary source for all sorts of information that will benefit parents and children. There will, for example, be a toll-free hotline, and a comprehensive site where parents can report problems and learn how to access other specific resources. We will engage in the evaluation of next-generation child-protection technologies, evaluate those that presently exist and make our findings known to the public. We will also work with content-management companies and developers of search engines to spur public awareness of these systems worldwide. The majority of these and other programs will be paid for by the adult-content industry itself. More than fifteen percent (15%) of all revenues generated by the .xxx domain will be devoted to these programs on an ongoing basis. Over time, depending on the registry's success, this has the potential to amount to millions of dollars.

In closing, let us both recap several elements of our proposal, and add one or two final thoughts. Clearly, despite our best efforts, a degree of misconception surrounds the .xxx domain, which we hope to dispel in our upcoming resubmission to ICANN. We can only repeat at this point that .xxx in no way restricts or attempts to manage, control or administer online adult content. Our registry facilitates its categorization only through the use of the internationally approved and adopted PICS system and ICM Registry's PICS comparable domain record labeling system.

We firmly believe our solution offers the classic win-win situation. We believe it to be practical, rational, strong and viable. Because of our commitment to a consensus-building approach, it embraces proactive solutions on the industry's part that will protect both children and free speech. It is, we freely admit, not a panacea or cure-all, but a critical first step. It will work best in a home environment, under parental control. But even there, parents -who may not themselves be computer-literate -- must exercise control by configuring their equipment. Through our non-profit educational programs, we can assist them in doing so, and can speed the development of new, improved technologies that will simplify and augment the process. At the moment, there is no all-encompassing and feasible solution to safeguarding children on the Internet. Attempts to legislate the distribution of content harmful to children have repeatedly failed. Regulation has proved inadequate to the task as well, and no existing technology is entirely foolproof and satisfactory.

To cite just one example, Congress recently adopted a strategy of limiting access to adult-content sites by means of filtering computers located in government-funded libraries and schools, but has been challenged in the courts. We ourselves do not support this or any other form of blanket, indiscriminate filtering or restriction of access -- both out of a concern for free speech and freedom of choice, and because neither we nor anyone else can defend against all manner of unsupervised access. No one -- and no system -can entirely thwart the highly determined and highly computer-literate teenager whose friend down the block has a PC in his bedroom.

Our proposal represents a critical first step on many fronts, because it is based on consensus. In the past, the diametrically opposed and firmly entrenched views of the adult-content industry and child advocacy groups have resulted in a stalemate. Our solution allows diverse groups to work together toward a common and universally desired goal.

Our proposal brings the adult-content providers into the tent, where they can productively discuss among themselves a wide range of issues and concerns, having -- by virtue of registering in the .xxx domain -- freely expressed their willingness to discuss them. The results of these discussions will be duly noted and will position them to reduce the risk of external intervention by regulators and government agencies around the world.

Our proposal is founded on present-day reality, but it will be responsive to change. It will evolve as the Internet evolves, growing and adapting to tomorrow's market and social conditions. As new technologies arise, in part because of the initiatives of the .xxx domain, they can be incorporated in a timely and orderly fashion.

Our proposal is supported by industry leaders, with whom we continue to develop a relationship based on mutual trust. It in no way undermines or attempts to rewrite the law or restrict free speech. It stems from and impacts on actual content, rather than merely setting up yet another roadblock or impediment.

Our proposal is achievable within the current climate and with the willing participation of the current players. It can be implemented immediately, from a technology standpoint. Our categorization system, although complex, breaks minimal brand-new ground and would not require a test period.

Our proposal will provide a source of solid, up-to-date information and reliable statistics for adult-content providers and researchers worldwide, while protecting the privacy of such providers and their customers.

Our proposal allows the adult-content industry to reduce the risk of a regulator or other third-party imposing an ad hoc solution upon them, and from the vagaries of change in the political arena, meanwhile holding it responsible for its own actions.

Our proposal furthers the ends we all desire -- the clear identification of adult-only material, its provision to adult consumers who wish to access it and its blockage from children.

We believe in our solution, and we intend to vigorously pursue it to a successful conclusion. We firmly believe in the value of the consensus-building process we have actively joined in, and in many cases led, over the past years, and we welcome this opportunity to contribute to the National Research Council's deliberations. We hope our submission -- which of necessity has been in the nature of a snapshot or interim report -- contributes in some tangible way to an understanding and resolution of the complex issues at hand. We would, of course, be pleased to appear at any future hearings the NRC may see fit to convene, so as to expand upon any aspect of our proposal.

We also invite any and all comment on this submission, so we can become aware of an even broader spectrum of concerns. Many of our previous submissions and applications are matters of public record and freely available. We caution only that they are now somewhat out of date, having been modified and, we hope, improved. We therefore ask that readers of this submission who wish to make their views known to us or to pose a question regarding our activities contact us at our Web site www.icmregistry.com.

Attachment 1

Excerpts of Live Testimony Before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications Congressional Hearing on ICANN, Feb 2001. [7]

“Politically, you would have had a stronger favorable receiving from this committee had you used your position to address pornographic material on the Internet ... You invite us now to legislatively get involved in forcing this issue.”

Hon. John Shimkus, Illinois

“Our understanding is that dot-xxx was rejected due to the controversy surrounding the idea, again that might have been a subjective type of analysis, I'm not sure, how is a dot-xxx avenue any different from current zoning laws? You are inviting us to have many more hearings to address some of these issues.”

Hon. John Shimkus, Illinois

”One of the policy issues that I would like to use as the basis for furthering our discussion in just a few minutes; that we've discussed here in this committee and also throughout the House and the Senate, is what to do about pornography on the Internet. One of several ideas that has been discussed is the creation of a top-level domain that would essentially zone the Internet voluntarily. We rejected early on of the idea of a government mandate for this to occur, but we have been very interested in whether the private sector might migrate in that direction, because, if it did, it might them be possible for Congress to offer incentives, not penalties, which would run afoul of the First Amendment guarantees, but incentives for people to list in that adult only top-level domain. Obviously, the most primitive screening software, indeed no screening software at all, virtually would be needed to the extent that this were successful in the marketplace for people to discriminate among the content that they were seeking. Indeed if you are an aficionado pornography type it would simplify your life, but for everyone else who wished to avoid it, it would also simplify theirs. So I begin by putting that question to you Dr. Cerf and perhaps ought to know the answer to this question but I haven't found it in what's gone by thus far. Were any of the 44 applications that you reviewed for such a top-level domain name?”

Hon. Christopher Cox, California

“Indeed one of the applications (ICM Registry's) proposed to operate .xxx. The discussions that issued among the board on this point turned in large measure uncertainty on how to enforce such movement or registration of those pornographic sites to that top-level domain. We all know that you can reach literally every domain on the Internet by using the domain name system so everywhere in the world, not just the United States one would need to create the incentives that you mentioned in order to persuade these purveyors to move over into this single global top-level domain.”

Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, Chairman of the Board of ICANN

“Let's just pause there for a moment because there is an assumption there that is not empirically in evidence and that is that there wouldn't be an advantage to being registered in a place were people might be expected to find you. .com is crowded with all sorts of things you've got to sort through them. One might expect rather rapidly to find what one was looking for on a domain that were like the other domains you selected descriptive of its purpose.”

Hon. Christopher Cox, California

I don't think that the board was able to conclude that they could guarantee that everyone would move over even though as you say there might be some incentive and so, in the absence of knowing for sure that it could be guaranteed we also ran into the question whether someone would then complain or in fact take legal action if in fact not everyone did move over. So enforcement was a principal concern.”

Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, Chairman of the Board of ICANN

Attachment 2

Quotes Discussing an Adult-Content TLD

Indeed, every adult webmaster we spoke with was vehemently opposed to the proliferation of Child Pornography on the Internet, considering it not only inherently heinous, but also a serious threat to the survival of the industry as a whole. For several years now, in fact, attorneys who represent adult Internet companies have been warning their clients to prepare for an imminent prosecutorial turn to the right.” [8]

Tom Hymes, AVN Online

”There is also a strong case for having a content-specific gTLD (and corresponding SLDs under ccTLDs) such as .xxx or .sex. Sexually explicit services could then be legally required to operate with domain names in this gTLD (or SLD under a ccTLD) that would make it much simpler and easier to control access to such sites to protect children from the whitehouse.com problem, for example. This would not be to impose censorship or restrict free speech, but would restore an effective means for consumer choice which sites like whitehouse.com subvert by exploiting that present ‘inherent propensity to confuse’). Similarly, non-commercial sites, including sites for abuse or complaint might usefully be allocated a specific SLD for that purpose.” [9]

British Telecom

”I am glad to support ICM Registry in their efforts to provide value to adult content consumers, adult content businesses, parents, employers, and other Internet bodies with their .xxx domain. I see great benefit to all Internet citizens from their successful bid towards this domain.” [10]

Andrew Edmond, CEO of Flying Crocodile

“The words 'sex' and 'porn' are consistently at or near the top of the list of words entered into search engines, and lead quickly to free samples of hard-core material,” said Bruce Watson, president of Internet watchdogs Enough is Enough. “We agree with the concept of an adult domain, which would make the content easier to isolate.”

“The concept of a .xxx domain is a positive move toward giving individuals better means of identifying and managing the content they may be accessing with their Web browser. Domain designations provide a voluntary solution, similar to the movie industry ratings. Adding more specific TLDs to the domain name system will benefit users everywhere.”

Kit Winter, general counsel of Interactive Gallery, Inc.

”Self-regulatory steps (by the adult-content industry) could restrict children's access to commercial online adult content and thus address a substantial portion of the concerns surrounding such materials. This industry should pursue efforts to encourage Web sites to self-label.” [11]

COPA Commission Report Final Recommendation

References:

1. Senator Lieberman's Testimony, June 2000. [return]

2. Bruce Watson's Testimony, June 2000. [return]

3. AVN Online, Oct 2000. [return]

4. RENO v. ACLU, June, 1997. [return]

5. Allan B. Davidson Testimony for the CDT, Feb, 2000. [return]

6. Platform for Internet Content Selection Service(PICS) Descriptions. [return]

7. Congressional Hearing on ICANN, Feb 2001. [return]

8. AVN Online, Oct 2000. [return]

9. BT letter to the U.S. DoC, Feb 1998. [return]

10. ICANN Reconsideration, Nov 2000. [return]

11. COPA Commission Final Report, Oct 2000. [return]

ITAS Home Page

CSTB Home

The National Academies

|