dotxxxblog

After almost a year of deliberation, during which I tried to hear all possible sides of the argument, I have made my decision:

DOTXXX is NOT the right solution… neither for kids, nor for the Web.

DOTXXX seriously imperils the First Amendment rights of Web publishers.

DOTXXX has been proposed as a way to, foremost, *identify* adult entertainment on the Web. While corralling and sectioning-off adult material into a broad, all-inclusive category provides basic identification, this is an overly simplistic, over-broad, low-common-denominator approach that neither provides protection for children nor does much for parents and communities interested in protecting their children.

Because it operates at the domain level, the DOTXXX approach to identification is essentially *server-side*. It also means it is necessarily a binary approach, allowing for only 2 possible conditions: inclusion or exclusion. The Supreme Court has upheld the principle that the classification of adult material is a matter for *community standards*. DOTXXX not only presumes to make that determination for all communities, it also presumes (because it only provides for one category, based on one definition) that all communities will agree.

What we need is a *client-side* classification system that provides for *multiple* categories. This is the only way to put control in the hands of parents and communities, where it belongs. And it is the only way to properly reflect the spectrum that adult material comprises. Parents and communities have the power to draw their own line. Parents and communities have a useful range of choices when deciding where to draw that line.

The Free Speech Coalition held its general membership meeting Thursday at the Marriott Warner Center in Woodland Hills, Calif. FSC staff and attorneys briefed the gathering of adult industry professionals on 2257 issues and .XXX, among other issues facing the industry.

Attorney and FSC board member Reed Lee briefed the membership on the recent 11th Circuit decision in U.S. vs. Williams, which struck down the pandering provision of the Protect Act.

Although that case involved a man convicted of child pornography possession, Lee explained that the case was important to the adult industry for two reasons, namely that it directly followed the Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft vs. FSC, which held that only material made with actual minors would be unprotected under the constitution. Second, Lee said that he believed the analysis used by the legal panel in the Williams case might be a harbinger of positive outcomes in the current 2257 litigation… more

free speech

The approval process for the .XXX top-level domain has taken yet another turn. With ICM Registry submitting a revised proposal, ICANN has once again opened the floor to comment from adult webmasters… more

icann