Roberto, Darlene and all, The problem here with this debate is first that .XXX is not a Domain Name as Darlene seems to mistakenly believe. It, .XXX is a TLD ( Top level Domain ) which is far different than a Domain Name. Second, the .XXX decision had only somwhat to do with a moral issue. More importantly is that such a TLD could be used for trapping users and registrants in a "Sticky Bun" type sting operation if they moved their previous DN's to this TLD name space, which was part of the reason it was being considered in the first place. Ergo, it would have been a dismal failure and as such was a bad choice for a new TLD on that basis alone... Third, any registry business that seeks to make a profit from the exploitation of women or children directly as the .XXX TLD represented is simply not exceptable ethically and horrific policy not to mention encourages illegal activity... -----Original Message-----

From: Roberto Gaetano <roberto@icann.org> Sent: May 28, 2008 9:08 AM To: "'Thompson, Darlene'" <DThompson@GOV.NU.CA>, 'Ross Rader' <ross@tucows.com>, 'John Levine' <johnl@iecc.com> Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide' <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [At-Large] The triple-x issue - Was: RE: Wrapping up the thread/discussion - Apoligies

Darlene,

...

(I really don't have a firm opinion on this) I'm just harkening back to the .xxx debate. In my mind, it was a good example of ICANN stepping outside of its role and taking part in a debate that was completely outside of its mandate. IMHO, if the .xxx people had all of their ducks in a row as per ICANN's rules, they should have been able to register that domain name. Instead there was this huge issue about morality (which is totally outside of ICANN's mandate). So, how far is this to be taken?

To set the record straight, I did vote against the delegation of the TLD, but not at all because of moral issues. When the story begun, I was still ALAC Liaison. Since I had no precise mandate to present a specific position, I expressed my own opinion in the Board discussion, which was that in the case of a sponsored TLD one of the key element was the consensus of the sponsored community. For a number of reasons, this was not the case for triple-x. Just consider simply the fact that most sites with adult content would not go to a specific TLD, exactly to avoid ghettization, and easy filtering. They want to reach the widest possible audience, and therefore would not accept being in an easily identifiable corner. This was my reason since the beginning. Coherently with this position, expressed over the many months during which this saga continued, I cast my vote against it when time came, as in the meantime I have become a voting director.

This said, I agree completely with you that the matter got politicized, and ICANN took the risk to act outside of its mandate. But the first move in this direction was not at all the consideration of moral opportunity, but the campaign promoted in favour of triple-x, with the (in my opinion bogus) consideration that delegation was necessary in order to promote free speech. I don't want to now reopen the debate of free speech vs. TLDs, and repeat things I have stated so many times, but would like only to note that the debate was derailed from the simple compliance to the charter to a broader (out-of-ICANN-scope) issue not by the opponents to the TLD for (in my opinion bogus) moral reasons, as they came into the picture only later, but by the folks who favoured the TLD for political reasons, who started campaigning from day one.

Best regards, Roberto

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827