Nickname: DorianGray

Review: Great job by ICANN to sniff out ICM. ICM is simply trying to make a business out of selling .xxx domains to adult companies. Reportedly, the fees for the .xxx domains were to be exorbitant, approximately $100 per domain. Essentially, companies selling or advertising adult content (the most profitable industry on the Web) would have to buy .xxx domains to protect their brand. That's how ICM makes money.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 10:34 PM

Nickname: philt

Review: Who said anything about it being religious groups that protested it? It's purely a matter of ICM Registry trying to monopolize .xxx domains. It, by no means, suggests that there wouldn't still be porn on non .xxx domains. It's all about money. Religious groups have nothing to do with it.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 7:55 PM

Nickname: Goowa

Review: I don't see why there shouldn't be a .xxx domain suffix. It only makes sense. Personally I don't think the content is appropriate, but that's got nothing to do with how it is classified. If and when it is classified as .xxx, then I think a lot of concerns about pornography on the Internet and protecting children from wandering upon it will become a much smaller and easier task. Based on the article here it would seem that ICANN made the decision based on US domestic concerns when it should be an international body. Boo!

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 5:05 PM

Nickname: Link

Review: You know, this is the best way to filter out porn. If they don't want it, I think that there is a subtler different reason.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 2:00 PM

Nickname: hiscity

Review: It mystifies me why any religious group would object to a .xxx domain since that would be the easiest way to filter out porn. If using a domain suffix is too hard to do, how about legislation requiring an xxx. prefix, in place of www. standard? If need be imminent domain style legislation could be used to implement the change. You would think that anyone that uses filters would see this as just common sense.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 1:05 PM

Nickname: micom

Review: ICANN shouldn't allow the xxx domain. Thanks.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 7:03 AM

Nickname: brichusi

Review: Great idea. I filled out the same application for this same idea years ago. But did not have the $70,000 for the nonrefundable application fee.

Date reviewed: May 23, 2006 6:16 AM