NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:32:48 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
It's supposed to donate to general foundations/organizations working on child abuse. But really that's mostly posturing of course; governments have seized on regulating the .xxx domain as if putting requirements on it really combats the more serious problems. As Perkel pointed out, the logic behind that often doesn't hold up. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Andrew A. Adams
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] Tom Morris takes on xxx
> 
> > I have to question a basic premise of the XXX "child porn" enforcement
> > cost= s. Since child porn is illegal and you go to jail for that, why
> > would you t= hink they would pay 7x as much for a domain under .xxx
> > where they would be = caught? Seems to me the last place you'd find a
> > child molester is with an x= xx domain. Does anyone thing they are
> going to register child-molester.xxx?
> >
> > The porn work and child molesting are two different worlds. They are
> > as dif= ferent as pot smokers and heroine addicts. If I were looking
> > for child mole= ster I would think that something like .info, which
> > spammers seem to like, = would be the place to go and it would only be
> > promoted withing the group. A=  .xxx is like inviting the cops to your
> house.
> >
> > So - I have to question if .xxx enforcement is a waste of money.
> >
> > The reason I'm making these arguments is that if ICANN starts becoming
> > the = "moral police" or an extension of law enforcement then that's a
> > slippery sl= ope. If porn is "immoral" then is being a Realist
> > (Atheist) immoral? In man= y countries I would be executed for my
> > non-belief because I choose reality = first.
> 
> Will the income stream from .xxx be put towards general efforts to
> attacking the availability of sex abuse images online, not just within
> .xxx? Or is it proposed that it is only within .xxx that this activity
> will take place?
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Professor Andrew A Adams                      [log in to unmask]
> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and Deputy
> Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2