Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Technology

Celebrities Flock To Reserve .xxx Domains 148

Posted by timothy from the always-leave-your-career-options-open dept.
hypnosec writes "Celebrities have moved swiftly to block their names from the .xxx domain, which is meant for websites that offer pornographic content. Thousands of celebrities have contacted ICM Registry to put their names on the permanently reserved list so that no one will be able to start offering porn under their name. The domain registration company, ICM Registry, failed to give out the list of domain names it had blocked nor it is willing to tell how long the list is. On a lighter note, OsamaBinLaden.xxx has been also blocked and we assume the Al Qaeda would have demanded to reserve the domain."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Celebrities Flock To Reserve .xxx Domains More

Celebrities Flock To Reserve .xxx Domains

Comments Filter:

  • protection racket (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:07AM (#37226474)

    protection racket

    • Re:protection racket (Score:4, Informative)

      by jhoegl ( 638955 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:59AM (#37226642)
      I saw no cost to add to "reserve" list.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I saw no cost to add to "reserve" list.

        I did.

        There are no corporate trademarks on the reserved list. Companies that want to make sure their brands do not appear with a .xxx extension are expected to pay between $200 and $650 to to make sure they are removed from the pool of available names.

    • Wasn't there a clause inserted when the xxx domain started that allows companies and entities to register their own .com or .org domain as a .xxx for cheap if they don't intend to use it as an adult site and only to block others from using it? I have a hard time believing that charging a few benjamins to a celebrity that makes millions is a racket.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Rich0 ( 548339 )

        The problem is that basically anytime a new TLD comes out everybody with a .com/etc domain is allowed to pre-register. Everybody does. So then the new domain ends up being a replica of the main domains, and just another annual check to write for domain owners. What is the point of that?

        Either just make it all first-come-first-serve, or get rid of all the TLDs, or enforce some criteria for actually registering on all but one TLDs.

  • This will lead to more and more .xx1, .xx2, .xx3 domain reservations.

  • people can be creative (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    ParisHilton.xxx may be blocked, but what about Paris-Hilton.xxx, Paris_Hilton.xxx, ParisXHilton.xxx, xxxParisHilton.xxx and WeWillAlwaysHaveParis.xxx?

  • This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Haedrian ( 1676506 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:22AM (#37226506)

    I don't just mean the reservations, but also the whole domain.

    If I wanted to see porn of the Celebrity named Jane Doe, I wouldn't go

    JaneDoePorn(com/xxx)
    PornJaneDoe(com/xxx)
    JaneDoePron(com/xxx)
    JaneDoePics(com/xxx)

    et cetera

    I'd open Google and type in "Jane Doe Porn" and see which links look good.

    If you're going to flood the xxx domain with useless garbage, then the whole concept of it is useless.

    • Re:This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SomePgmr ( 2021234 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:28AM (#37226524) Homepage
      Without enforcement, which won't exist and nobody wants anyways, the whole concept is useless anyway.

      There's no utility in this besides the cash grab.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rjch ( 544288 )

      I think the idea is to force all porn sites across to the .xxx domain eventually, which will make parental controls much easier to configure and enforce - hell, it could become a feature of your ISP that all .xxx domains are blocked by default, but can be enabled on request. (in the same way a few ISPs here in Australia block ports 25, 80, 135, 139 and 443 by default, but these port blocks can be removed simply by logging in to your account and disabling the port blocking)

      • Re:This is stupid (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SomePgmr ( 2021234 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:33AM (#37226540) Homepage
        I can't even begin to imagine the colossal nightmare of trying to figure what should and shouldn't be on the .xxx domain, and policing it. Such a rule probably won't ever happen, but if it does, it'll be either a damned mess, totally fail in its intended purpose, or both.

        • Oh but they can (Score:5, Insightful)

          by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @07:23AM (#37226740) Journal

          I work in the industry and have followed this. The evil in the .xxx domain is staggering.

          First is the pure money grab, same as with .mobi and .travel and several others. Ever use them for legit sites? No? But lots of companies paid for their domain name nonetheless. Domain names are cheap? Not the .xxx ones. This ain't a service it is a commercial business and they want some real cash. Oh not enough to be a major worry to most companies but enough to add up.

          Then there is the provision that the registar has that they reserve the right to scan your site. That doesn't happen with any other domain but it does for the .xxx domain. Harmless you say? Most porn sites are members only. Is the registar going to need a full access account for every site to scan it? They refuse to answer. Who is going to responsible for leaked access? They don't even acknowledge that question. How is an American company going to deal with laws in different countries, as in why would a Japanese site have to follow US rules or vice versa?

          But the final evil is why lots of politicians are in favor of it.

          What is Playboy magazine? A porn mag OR a magazine with some pictures of nudity? The difference is important. The US has no clear anti-porn laws, instead it has laws that prohibit obscene material. What is obscene? That is a very good question and so far the courts have been unable to answer it.

          Porn is legal in the US as long as no court can define it as being obscene. In olden days this explains nudist magazines and movies. By shooting it as a documentary on nudist live a movie could be sold that was just a skin flick. It is educational!

          This has never gone totally away in the US although a lot of porn IS produced as purely porn the laws are still there and plenty of politicians would be willing to enforce them.

          But how can you proof something is porn? How do you proof playboy.com is just obscenity? Well, a bloody big clue would be playboy.xxx Godwin be damned but it is a yellow star. Why do you think the yellow star was used on jews but not say a black star on blacks in America? Because there was no need to, you can tell a black person just by looking a them and therefor there was no risk of a black person going into a whites only store. The only way to enfore "gein juden" was to force them to wear an identifier.

          If you force all porn on the .xxx domain you have also forced to label themselves as porn. To those who wish to purge porn from the web, step 1.

          Will this happen? Some believe so, the same kind of people that defended Larry Flint. Not because they liked Hustler so much but because of this "joke".

          An Arminain grandfather lies on his deathbed and calls his sons to him to depart some final wisdom, "Remember my sons, always defend the jews."

          Why the jews the oldest son asks.

          "Because once they are gone, we will be next".

          The web as it exist now is a mess, porn, business, copyright infringement, press all mixed up with no easy way to tell which is which. But it makes it very hard for a group to silence a part of it. See the US problems with trying to filter porn in public libraries. Oops, it may contain sex but it is also free speech. .xxx would have no such protection since by its label it is only obscenity and that doesn't fall under free speech.

          .XXX is a multi-layered beast. At first glance it seems just like a money grab until you realize that there is political support for it for over a decade from a certain quarter and they are NOT in it for they money. They got other motives and once they become evident it will be too late.

          Remember this, when it was asked during a conference that IF as the registar said market forces would decide if it was a success or not that ANOTHER option for the registar who invested a LOT of money in this MIGHT use their political mussle to buy ADDITIONAL laws to FORCE purchase of .xxx domains to save their business, the representative plain refused to answer.

          Google will do wonders for some more insights.

          • Clap. Clap. Nice soliloquy.

          • Well you guys caused your problems,porn emails, faking web site names, Graphic sex acts not covered like magazines. You made the mess by being irresponsible. Playboy mags hustler,penthouse puritan mag all are covered with a brown wrapper in book stores/mag stands. Internet porn isn't covered or made difficult for children not to see even if they try with filters you guys try to beat the filters and thats irresponsible. Im no prude ive worked in an adult book store for a while so im all for porn. You dont ha
            • Um... How are they forcing people to view it? Last time I knew I didn't just open up Firefox and ZOMG Pr0n EVERYWHERE!!!! Except for some malware that puts up porn popups along with screwing up your system, you don't randomly go on the internet and see porn. Porn spam e-mails is like every other spam e-mail, have a decent enough filter and it won't go through. Such things are like saying lets ban Viagra because it happens to be the subject of many a spam e-mail.
              • Some porn sites are known for their rather over-determined advertising - I've seen things like search engine manipulation, forum-spamming, etc. These sites typically aren't operated from the US though, or associated with any large porn company. They are just small porn distributors (Half the time distributing pirate porn at that) desperate to do anything to get customers in a saturated market.

            • How in the world did you find out about our evil scheme to hold children hostage and force them to look at pornography websites? The possibility that a child could accidentally look at pornography was also part of our plan. Their entire lives will be obliterated from looking at pornography!

            • You do realize that the people stuffing your inbox with porn are not actually in charge of The Porn Industry, right? What you're saying is the equivalent of saying that [insert local minority here] deserves what they get because they steal things, bring down property values, etc.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by tommy8 ( 2434564 )
            It is Armenian not Arminain and the Armenians were killed during World War I before the Jews.

          • I agree with most of your reasons why this is A Bad Thing, but I believe you are mistaken about the legal issue of pornography vs. obscenity. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled (even in recent years) that pornography is protected speech. As long as it isn't obscene pornography, it still enjoys First Amendment protection, and any laws against mere "pornography" that are still on the books are not enforceable. Although putting a .xxx TLD on something would certainly prove to any reasonable person that it was

          • First they came.... (Score:1)

            by Anonymous Coward

            First they came for the lolicon manga.... [jaqrabbit.com]

          • But how can you proof something is porn? How do you proof playboy.com is just obscenity?

            If you force all porn on the .xxx domain you have also forced to label themselves as porn.

            Wait, if people already have trouble identifying porn sites, how will you be able to "force" porn sites to .xxx? If you already know its porn, you don't need the .xxx to know that, and if you need the .xxx to know that, then you can't force them to move.

            If courts now can't agree on what is and is not porn, there is no way to force porn to the .xxx domain. If they go voluntarily, then its not much of a "yellow"star, is it? Your logic seems seriously flawed. Then again, I suppose I shouldn't have expected mor

            • Then again, I suppose I shouldn't have expected more from a person who compares the pron industry to the Jews.

              Have you ever heard of an analogy? He was saying it was vaguely similar in one or more ways. That does not mean he was saying that it's as "bad" as what happened in the event that he's vaguely comparing it to. It simply means that it might be similar in one or more ways (like, for instance, the fact that no one will be able to stand up for you if you're the only one left).

        • Its simple, Graphic depictions of sex acts thats pornography. Soft porn/erotica obscured or suggestive sex acts.Why do people make something that is so simple so hard?

          • What about:

            - Artwork? Paintings? Photographs?
            -- Would you count "The Birth of Venus" as pornography? She has got a bit showing.
            - Nudism?
            - Certain Prose?

            • If it has graphic depictions of the sex acts it belongs in the xxx domain. nudism isn't about sex acts nor do they show sex acts its nudity thats a million miles different then sex acts. Certain poses are meant to stimulate sexually,graphic poses of genitalia is Soft porn. Everything has its place and its common since and its very simple to figure out. Soft porn is 18 and above now for books and movies why should it be any different on the internet? It shouldn't

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by paiute ( 550198 )

            Its simple, Graphic depictions of sex acts thats pornography. Soft porn/erotica obscured or suggestive sex acts.Why do people make something that is so simple so hard?

            I totally agree. Now we just need to define 'graphic', 'depictions', 'sex', and 'acts'.

          • http://www.google.com/search?q=leda&tbm=isch&biw=1680&bih=871 [google.com]

            Porn. Lots of porn. Lots and lots of porn. Except... it hangs up openly in art galleries around the world. Drawn by some of the most respected names in classical art, including Leonardo. How can that be porn?
          • Anything that shows a woman's ankle or belly button should also be on the domain.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Calos ( 2281322 )

        They block 80 and 443 by default?! Those are standard HTTP and HTTPS. How on earth can you log into any website to fix that?

        • Only for a server though right? Unless you're planning on hosting your own server you won't need those open.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Inbound, to protect averagely uninterested users from accidentally exposing their routers configuration interface to the world.

          (25 to prevent access to open relays on customers' computers, 135 and 139 to prevent access to unprotected SMB shares)

          • Yup - same with BT here. The router blocks all incoming ports by default, but you can open them as needed - or simply set up a single machine in a DMZ and use that to handle all incoming requests, port forwarding etc. Quite a good way to do it really. The downside is that (by default) anyone with a BT account can log in to your router. It's "opt-in" meaning you have to opt-out of it...

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        But that will not work unless we somehow can get global standard for what is porn.

        Should the content be moved to .xxx if all cultures think it is porn, or is it enough with only one culture?

        How about smaller groups or just personal preferences? With sites like this http://www.objectum-sexuality.org/ in the end you would have to move content containing people showing any skin what so ever or wearing clothes revealing any hints about body shape. You would also have to move content with animals, buildings, pla

      • I think the idea is to force all porn sites across to the .xxx domain eventually

        Sounds like a stupid idea to me. For what purpose? How could they possibly force every single porn website in existence (even unidentified ones) to use the .xxx domain? That'd be quite hard to enforce. And who would want to enforce it?

        I doubt this is their idea at all.

        it could become a feature of your ISP that all .xxx domains are blocked by default

        For what? People who could probably be considered overprotective parents? If they want to "protect" their children from something I deem as harmless, then I think they should be the ones doing the work.

        Not only that, but this kind of blocking

        • If it's blocked by default, then it'll probably stay blocked. Think of the problems of people trying to justify to their spouse while they need the porn unblocked, or of over-eighteens still living at home having to explain to their parents. If ISPs start blocking .xxx by default, it'll put .xxx sites at such huge commercial disadvantage they'll just have to go back to either .com or (if the US forces them to get off there) to one of the country-code TLDs.

      • I can't imagine that ports 80 and 443 would be blocked by default.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Zedrick ( 764028 )
      Seconded. There was a time, perhaps around -94 or -95, when I would type in an url that described what I was looking for. Then webcrawler (the first decent searchengine) came along and made that whole "SLD having any relation to the content" thing useless.

    • If I wanted to see porn of the Celebrity named Jane Doe, I wouldn't go...

      I know, right? I mean, Jane Doe is so hot. Her girl-on-girl and ATM are the best. Her brilliant schoolroom scene in the 2008, No Country for Old Milfs 2 is nothing short of a masterpiece.

      She lost a lot of her cachet after Tiger Woods did her, however.

      • ... and ATM are the best.

        I love Automated Teller Machines.

        Yes I know what it also stands for, but when I read that through the first time I was imagining a woman getting money from a bank and was wondering what is wrong with some people.

        I still wonder now though.

        • Yes I know what [ATM] also stands for, but when I read that through the first time I was imagining a woman getting money from a bank and was wondering what is wrong with some people.

          And then you found out what "ATM" porn actually was... and you *really* wondered what was wrong with some people. I hope....

          Anyway, I'm sure there are women out there who certainly *would* get turned on if the amounts of money coming out of the ATM were enough. :-/

    • Domains matching your search criteria would probably rate highly though...

  • What rules are applied to this domain? If (for example) someone registers something like universal.xxx, would Universal Studios be able to challenge the validity of this domain in the same way as if someone registered universal_studios.com?

  • Misspellings, typographical differences (hyphens), and that is not even taking into account domain names can contain numbers.

    You can't buy them all. But the owners of the .xxx registry are making a tidy sum off the gullibility of celebrities, so it's all good.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by petman ( 619526 )
      From what I understand from TFA, the celebs don't have to pay to get on the list, so no one's making money out of this.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by frisket ( 149522 )
      Hah! Just wait for full Unicode in domain names :-) Then the heist can start all over again...
  • Congratulations ICANN to all that extra cash. Defensive registrations is an untapped gold mine. I'd recommend adding one sex domain per year.

    • Re:Congratulations ICANN (Score:4, Informative)

      by petman ( 619526 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @07:01AM (#37226650)
      From what I understand from TFA, the celebrities don't have to pay to get on the list, so no one's making money out of this.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        ICM says that it has reserved roughly 15,000 domains from registration, but this includes names that have been blocked on cultural grounds (the world's capital cities and half a dozen spellings of Mohammed, for example) and thousands of "premium" names that the company plans to auction later.

  • Idea (Score:3)

    by Haedrian ( 1676506 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @06:50AM (#37226604)

    I wonder if I can register a .sucks TLD.

    I'm sure businesses will clamour to register the companyName.sucks domain to prevent competitors messing it up.

    Win.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • There, fixed that headline for you.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mbone ( 558574 )

      Well, that's what I get for not RTFA first. Celebrities don't have to pay, at least for now. Companies, however, do

      There are no corporate trademarks on the reserved list. Companies that want to make sure their brands do not appear with a .xxx extension are expected to pay between $200 and $650 to to make sure they are removed from the pool of available names

      Most of the people I know who deal in domain names feel that the new ICANN TLD policy is primarily about domain name extortion, rather than actually pro

  • Is it going to be "slashdot.xxx", or "xxx.slashdot.org" ?

  • Quickly! Someone please block this before it is too late!

  • Might be like being German, and being called Adolf 60 years ago, but that doesn't mean that another Osama bin Laden didn't ask to have him name removed....

  • Bachmann? (Score:3)

    by cashman73 ( 855518 ) on Saturday August 27, 2011 @08:45AM (#37227154) Journal
    I see that michelebachmann.xxx is reserved, but marcusbachmann.xxx is still available,. . . Likewise, rickperry.xxx is reserved, but Stephen Colbert could still reserve rickparry.xxx in the name of ColbertSUPERPAC,. . . ;-)
  • Why is this needed? Celebrities have their name as a trademark. If someone registers a porn site to their trademarked name, they can make a small fortune by suing. This sounds like something that came out of a PR feed to create demand for .xxx domains.
    • As I understand legal procedure, being proactive about enforcing your exclusive rights is considered better practice than sleeping on your rights just to get bigger damages [wikipedia.org]. This is true of trademarks even more than of copyrights and patents.
      • The issue you are talking about is enforcing one's rights by legal means. It does not mean one need to take preemptive action against would be imposters.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        Celebrities are already 'using' their names in a trademark fashion. Just because somebody tacks .com, .net, or .xxx onto them doesn't make it a new name.

  • Okay, something really strange just happened to me. First, I must say that I was not trying to look for porn! Just out out of curiosity, I typed sex.xxx into my chrome browser awesome bar and the sex.xxx URL went to my Dlink router login page! I tried it again and it went to my Dlink router login page again! I'm in totally in disbelieve! Can some please try this and see if they get the same result! Yes I have had something to drink, but I'm not imagining things!!!!!!!!!

  • Seriously, their a terrible idea and this shows why. We don't need to create problems like WhiteHouse.com vs. .gov. Creating problems is just plain stupid.

    The only TLDs that should exist might be those that are meaningful like edu, gov, org and mil. The rest are crap. Get rid of them. /sophomoric excuse making in 3... 2... 1....

    • Excuse 1: The USA is not the only country on the internet.

      Oh wait, that actually torpedoed your entire post. Whoops.

Slashdot Top Deals

By working faithfully eight hours a day, you may eventually get to be boss and work twelve. -- Robert Frost

Close