Difference between revisions of ".adult"

From ICANNWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Controversy)
Line 32: Line 32:
  
 
The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/20121127093808906.pdf DomainIncite.com/Docs] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref><ref>[http://domainincite.com/11130-europe-rejects-icanns-authority-as-it-warns-of-problems-with-58-new-gtlds Europe Rejects ICANNs Authority As it Warns of Problems with 58 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref>
 
The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/20121127093808906.pdf DomainIncite.com/Docs] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref><ref>[http://domainincite.com/11130-europe-rejects-icanns-authority-as-it-warns-of-problems-with-58-new-gtlds Europe Rejects ICANNs Authority As it Warns of Problems with 58 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref>
 +
 +
==Independent Objectior==
 +
The '''Independent Objector'''  is responsible for determining if a new gTLD application is in the best interest of the Internet community. If not, he or she will file formal objections against a new gTLD application. [[Alain Pellet]], a law professor from the University of Paris and a former member of the United Nations International Law Commission and International Court of Justice, was chosen by ICANN to serve as the sole independent objector for the [[New gTLD Program]] in May, 2012. <ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-14may12-en.htm Independent Objector for New gTLD Program Selected]. ICANN. Published 2012 May 14.</ref> The position was created by ICANN in accordance with the implementation of the [[New gTLD Program]]. As defined, the IO may be an individual or organization and must not be affiliated with any applicant and must carry out their responsibility without bias.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/wanted-somebody-to-object-to-new-gtlds/ Wanted: somebody to object to new gTLDs]. Domain Incite. Published 2011 November 23. Retrieved 2012 November 15.</ref>
 +
 +
In December 2012 Mr. Pellet released his first correspondence on actual TLDs, commenting on so-called "Controversial strings". Those strings include: [[.adult]], [[.sex]], [[.porn]], [[.sexy]], [[.hot]], [[.gay]], [[.lgbt]], [[.persiangulf]], [[.vodka]], and [[.wtf]]. A string seemed to have been deemed "controversial" by Mr. Pellet if it received a substantial amount of objections during the public comment period. He addresses each TLD separately and at length, noting the objection, and turning to International law and precedent to determine whether an objection from his point of view, of defending the public interest, is warranted. In each case he concludes that the objections are not supported by international law and that regional, cultural, and personal issues influence the objections rather than broadly accepted treaties, laws, or international cultural trends. He has reserved the right to later object to the strings, but at that time it was deemed that the "controversial strings" are in fact not offensive to the greater public interest and Internet users.<ref>[http://www.independent-objector-newgtlds.org/english-version/the-independent-objector-s-comments-on-controversial-applications/ The Independent Objectors Comments on Controversial Applications, Independent-Objector-NewgTLDs.org]Retrieved 8 Jan 2013</ref>
 +
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
{{reflist}}
 
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 19:54, 8 January 2013

Status: Proposed
Registry: ICM Registry
Registry Backend: Afilias
Type: Generic
Category: Industry
Priority #: 1157 - ICM Registry
nTLDStats
Registrations: 8,631
Parked Domains: 7,319
Parked Domain %: 84.8 %
Important Dates
Delegation: 06 December 2014
General Availability: 04 June 2015

More Information: NTLDStatsLogo.png

.adult is a proposed TLD in ICANN's New gTLD Program. ICM Registry, also applying for .porn and .sex. ICM Registry is the operator .xxx

Application Details

The gTLD is intended for the use the adult entertainment community. ICM Registry CEO Stuart Lawley explained that all registered domain names under the .xxx gTLD will be grandfathered under the .adult gTLD if approved by ICANN. Matching names with .adult domain name extension will be automatically registered to the registrants at no cost. However, a minimal amount will be charged if a registrant eventually decides to activate and use the reserved .adult domain name.[1]

Controversy

Christian group Morality In Media launched a letter-writing campaign in July 2012 against ICM's three new TLD applications, .adult, .sex, and .porn. The group also protested against .xxx, ICM's original TLD. The group claims that its prediction about .xxx, that it would create more porn and not less, has been vindicated, as porn sites under the .com TLD have not moved to .xxx, and additional new sites have been created under the .xxx extension.[2] With its campaign, MIM asked the U. S. Government and Congress and ICANN to take action against the spread of porn under the Internet by not allowing the three new TLDs into the root zone.[3]

European Commission Objection

The European Commission Objected to .adult outside the defined ICANN remediation processes.

Just after ICANN's GAC issued its Early Warnings, which are advice given from one GAC member country to an applicant warning it of potential issues within its application, the European Commission issued a letter to all applicants within the new gTLD program. The letter highlights 58 applications that "could raise issues of compatibility with the existing legislation .. and/or with policy positions and objectives of the European Union."

The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.[4][5]

Independent Objectior

The Independent Objector is responsible for determining if a new gTLD application is in the best interest of the Internet community. If not, he or she will file formal objections against a new gTLD application. Alain Pellet, a law professor from the University of Paris and a former member of the United Nations International Law Commission and International Court of Justice, was chosen by ICANN to serve as the sole independent objector for the New gTLD Program in May, 2012. [6] The position was created by ICANN in accordance with the implementation of the New gTLD Program. As defined, the IO may be an individual or organization and must not be affiliated with any applicant and must carry out their responsibility without bias.[7]

In December 2012 Mr. Pellet released his first correspondence on actual TLDs, commenting on so-called "Controversial strings". Those strings include: .adult, .sex, .porn, .sexy, .hot, .gay, .lgbt, .persiangulf, .vodka, and .wtf. A string seemed to have been deemed "controversial" by Mr. Pellet if it received a substantial amount of objections during the public comment period. He addresses each TLD separately and at length, noting the objection, and turning to International law and precedent to determine whether an objection from his point of view, of defending the public interest, is warranted. In each case he concludes that the objections are not supported by international law and that regional, cultural, and personal issues influence the objections rather than broadly accepted treaties, laws, or international cultural trends. He has reserved the right to later object to the strings, but at that time it was deemed that the "controversial strings" are in fact not offensive to the greater public interest and Internet users.[8]

References