Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

ICANN rejects porn domain info request

Kevin Murphy, October 13, 2010, 18:21:50 (UTC), Domain Registries

ICANN has turned down a request from porn trade group the Free Speech Coalition for more information about the .xxx top-level domain application, including a list of its pre-registrations.

The organization sent a letter (pdf) to the FSC’s director Diane Duke last week, saying that the materials it requested about ICM Registry and IFFOR, its sponsorship body, are confidential.

This would make the information exempt from ICANN’s Documentary Information Disclosure Policy.

The FSC had specifically requested:

1. The list of the IFFOR Board members;
2. The list of proposed members of the Policy Council;
3. IFFOR’s Business Plan/Financials;
4. Business Plan/Financials Years 1‐5 utilizing 125,000 Initial Registrations;
5. The list of .XXX sTLD pre-registrants who have been identified to ICANN; and
6. ICM’s Proof of Sponsorship Community Support as submitted to ICANN.

According to ICANN, ICM was asked if it would like to lift the confidentiality restrictions and ICM did not respond.

The FSC believes that many of .xxx’s 180,000+ pre-registrations are defensive in nature, made by pornographers who would really prefer that the TLD is never approved, which ICM disputes.

Tagged: , , , , ,

Comments (3)

  1. “According to ICANN, ICM was asked … ICM did not respond.”

    Are you saying ICM did not run like a puppy dog… begging to respond to the next bone being tossed ?

    Is ICM starting to wise up ?

  2. Well, as much as I think ICANN’s DIDP is unnecessarily restrictive, inefficient, and not sufficient accountable, I think the logic in this case is pretty solid.

    The FSC asked ICANN for information that it had been provided confidentially. ICANN asked the provider, ICM Registry, if this was okay. ICM didn’t get back. Therefore ICANN is in no position to provide it.

    Of course there are other questions about defaults in openness and what ICANN can and cannot presume should be confidential and what should not, but in this case it would actually have been very worrying if ICANN *had* provided the information it was asked for.

    Kieren

  3. Darklady says:

    I guess what I can’t understand is why I’ve never heard a peep from any of the allegedly 180,000 pre-registrars who supports .XXX.

    I have, however, hear any number of peeps who registered because they’re worried about protecting their trademarks.

    ICM Registry doesn’t give a damn about the adult industry or those who work within it. It just wants a chunk of the vast cash reserves it seems to think we have stashed away somewhere.

    You don’t trash talk the industry press and trade association if you want to understand the industry you’re trying to make bank off — but that’s what Stuart Lawley’s been doing, when he bothers to deal with us at all.

Add Your Comment