Welcome to P2PNET.net - The original daily p2p and digital news site. Always First!
Register | Login
RIAA News
Cool Stuff
MPAA News
Games / Consoles
News
Music
Movies
TV
Open Source
Mobiles
Advertising
Product News
P2P
Off Topic
Freedom
Politics
Interviews
Security
DRM
Links
p2pnet Digests
Search: 
Search
 
Web P2PNET   
Search: 
Search
Torrent Site Tracker
TekSavvy
Add real-time p2pnet headlines to YOUR site ! Click here to download our newsfeed code
p2pnet - rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | p2pnet celebrities: http://p2pnet.net/celeb.rss | Mobile? http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

The Return of .XXX?

p2p news / p2pnet: Plans to put online porn featuring the ‘lewd exhibition of the genitals’ into a red-light cyber zone have been proposed by US senators Mark Pryor and Max Baucus.

The two have introduced the Cyber Safety for Kids Act of 2006 which would require the US Department of Commerce to work with ICANN to develop plans for a domain name system that would house material deemed “harmful to minors,” says ZDNet News.

“That material, according to the bill, includes any ‘communication,’ image, article, recording or other ‘obscene” matter, including actual or simulated sexual acts and ‘lewd exhibition of the genitals or post-pubescent female breast’.”

Last summer, ICANN approved the .xxx concept, “But a firestorm of protests followed, including pleas by the Bush administration to put any action on hold,” says ZDNet, adding:

“ICANN twice delayed its decision and ultimately decided last December to postpone a vote indefinitely, saying it needed more time to review the details.”

The Free Speech Coalition says the idea is unconstitutional “ghettoization,” says the Associated Press, also pointing out that last year’s anti-xxx protesters included the “conservative groups” Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council.

Also See:
ZDNet News - US Senate restarts .XXX debate, March 20, 2006
Associated Press - Virtual Red-Light District For Porn Sites Under Fire, March 17, 2006

HOME

2 Responses to “The Return of .XXX?”

  1. Reader's Write Says:

    Ok, I’ve stopped laughing. Exactly who is going to be a .xxx judge sending a citation to a site author either to remove, to .xxx naming, their mating actions and/or equipment OR have their plug pulled?

    Would it not be better to create a .cop (clean of porn) instead so folks could clearly show they are NOT broadcasting crap.

    By the way, speaking of broadcasting:

    If over a WI-FI you are sending porn doesn’t this have anything to do with the FCC?

    www.allcleanhere.cop

  2. Reader's Write Says:

    ’cause you simply can’t police it.

    If I was a webmaster running a porn site, I wouln’t want kids looking at it because they can buy anything.

Leave a Reply

    Advertisments
Blubster
MP3Rocket