International Foundation for Online Responsibility: Difference between revisions

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 64:

==IFFOR Taxes and .xxx Registration Volume==

Research into the 2012 tax return filed by IFFOR inevitably raised questions about the number of registrations that [[ICM Registry]] is paying to IFFOR, given that the registry is supposed to be giving its sponsoring organization $10 per [[.xxx]] registration. Registration figures from December 2011 put the .xxx registry at 106,549 domains registered, with an additional 80,000 one time blocked domains, while IFFOR only reported revenue of $208,000. Questions raised from this include: Why did IFFOR not publicly raise the issue of substantial missing payment; Is ICM violating its contract with ICANN by not explicitly following its agreement with IFFOR; Is ICM only giving $10 to IFFOR for a certain type of registration, if so, which type and when was this decided? If it is true that ICM is only paying IFFOR for registrations from within the adult community, for which IFFOR is the sponsoring organization, then this means that the large part of [[.xxx]] registrations are from outside the community, i.e., defensive registrations. This issue was brought to light via an article by [[Michael G. Berkens]], the tax return was obtained by [[George Kirikos]].<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/what_did_we_learn_today_about_xxx_from_iffor_tax_return/ What Did We Learn Today about XXX from IFFOR Tax Return, CircleID.com]Published and Retrieved 7 Feb 2013</ref>

Research into the 2012 tax return filed by IFFOR inevitably raised questions about the number of registrations that [[ICM Registry]] is paying to IFFOR, given that the registry is supposed to be giving its sponsoring organization $10 per [[.xxx]] registration. Registration figures from December 2011 put the .xxx registry at 106,549 domains registered, with an additional 80,000 one time blocked domains, while IFFOR only reported revenue of $208,000. Questions raised from this include: Why did IFFOR not publicly raise the issue of substantial missing payment; Is ICM violating its contract with ICANN by not explicitly following its agreement with IFFOR; Is ICM only giving $10 to IFFOR for a certain type of registration, if so, which type and when was this decided? If it is true that ICM is only paying IFFOR for registrations from within the adult community, for which IFFOR is the sponsoring organization, then this means that the large part of [[.xxx]] registrations are from outside the community, i.e., defensive registrations. This issue was brought to light via an article by [[Michael Berkens]], the tax return was obtained by [[George Kirikos]].<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/what_did_we_learn_today_about_xxx_from_iffor_tax_return/ What Did We Learn Today about XXX from IFFOR Tax Return, CircleID.com]Published and Retrieved 7 Feb 2013</ref>

==References==

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 ==IFFOR Taxes and .xxx Registration Volume==
-Research into the 2012 tax return filed by IFFOR inevitably raised questions about the number of registrations that [[ICM Registry]] is paying to IFFOR, given that the registry is supposed to be giving its sponsoring organization $10 per [[.xxx]] registration. Registration figures from December 2011 put the .xxx registry at 106,549 domains registered, with an additional 80,000 one time blocked domains, while IFFOR only reported revenue of $208,000. Questions raised from this include: Why did IFFOR not publicly raise the issue of substantial missing payment; Is ICM violating its contract with ICANN by not explicitly following its agreement with IFFOR; Is ICM only giving $10 to IFFOR for a certain type of registration, if so, which type and when was this decided? If it is true that ICM is only paying IFFOR for registrations from within the adult community, for which IFFOR is the sponsoring organization, then this means that the large part of [[.xxx]] registrations are from outside the community, i.e., defensive registrations. This issue was brought to light via an article by [[Michael G. Berkens]], the tax return was obtained by [[George Kirikos]].<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/what_did_we_learn_today_about_xxx_from_iffor_tax_return/ What Did We Learn Today about XXX from IFFOR Tax Return, CircleID.com]Published and Retrieved 7 Feb 2013</ref>
+Research into the 2012 tax return filed by IFFOR inevitably raised questions about the number of registrations that [[ICM Registry]] is paying to IFFOR, given that the registry is supposed to be giving its sponsoring organization $10 per [[.xxx]] registration. Registration figures from December 2011 put the .xxx registry at 106,549 domains registered, with an additional 80,000 one time blocked domains, while IFFOR only reported revenue of $208,000. Questions raised from this include: Why did IFFOR not publicly raise the issue of substantial missing payment; Is ICM violating its contract with ICANN by not explicitly following its agreement with IFFOR; Is ICM only giving $10 to IFFOR for a certain type of registration, if so, which type and when was this decided? If it is true that ICM is only paying IFFOR for registrations from within the adult community, for which IFFOR is the sponsoring organization, then this means that the large part of [[.xxx]] registrations are from outside the community, i.e., defensive registrations. This issue was brought to light via an article by [[Michael Berkens]], the tax return was obtained by [[George Kirikos]].<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/what_did_we_learn_today_about_xxx_from_iffor_tax_return/ What Did We Learn Today about XXX from IFFOR Tax Return, CircleID.com]Published and Retrieved 7 Feb 2013</ref>
 ==References==