Opponents of two top level domain names are fighting a losing battle.
As the introduction of new top level domain names looms, two groups are still fighting over TLDs that have been in the funnel for quite some time.
First, there’s .jobs. It has been an actual sTLD for some time, but the registry recently decided to liberalize registration rules for the domains. This has the online job board community in a tizzy as many of them worry about new competition as well as the cost of defensive registrations.
Then there’s .xxx, which both conservatives and adult site operators oppose. Right now it seems that conservatives have given up the fight but adult site operators, upset about having to protect their brands as well as the potential for governments to try to force these site operators to use .xxx, are fighting in full force.
Each of these opposition groups has some valid points. For .jobs the way this all went down is a bit shady. Somewhat of a bait and switch. As for .xxx, I’m sure some governments will try to use .xxx as a way to add censorship requirements.
But it’s time to give it up. New top level domain names are coming, and if it isn’t .xxx or .jobs, it will be something else. The job boards could face .career, .resume, or something else. Adult site operators could have to suck it up and register .sex, .porn, or any myriad of other adult-related top level domain names.
The point is these guys are all fighting a losing battle. Battling these individual top level domain names isn’t going to get them anywhere in the long run.
Honestly, if anyone wants to push off the introduction of new TLDs, their best bet is to upset ICM Registry, which is going for .xxx. If .xxx drags on any longer, don’t be surprised if they sue to block the introduction of new TLDs until they get .xxx approved and launched.
Kevin Murphy says
I think the problem the jobs boards face is that .jobs is a category killer. Nothing comes close for SEO purposes.
At least the porn industry could easily compete with .sex or .porn. I don’t see what string could match up to .jobs.
Andrew Allemann says
@ Kevin Murphy – true, .jobs is a hard one to top.
Ryan says
Agree, I see nothing wrong with the .XXX
extension at all……..it might be a good idea to coral ALL porn sites to this extension, that way it can be blocked for those who don’t want to see it.
BTW, this has nothing to do with “censorship”
but it has a lot to do with saving the iinnocence of a lot of kids who can easily find porn under the existing extensions.
SL says
@Ryan: You may not call it censorship but it definitely falls under the category of “unintended consequences”.
Right now, netnanny blockers detect youporn.com, etc. just fine. But anyone who wants to access it can spend a minute to connect through a proxy. It’s a breeze to do.
If anything .xxx gives kids an easier target to get porn. After mommy tucks him in, all little Johnny needs to do is type in pornterm.xxx through the proxy. See what happened there? No need to search for endless .com sites. Johnny knows he’s going to find something good at .xxx.
It’s a perfect example of how self-righteous censorship is a tricky thing, and usually produces the opposite result of what was intended. Kind of like the Streisand effect.
For these folks it’s usually better to just let other people live their lives the way they want to, and tend their own gardens instead. Primarily by taking the initiative to learn how this stuff works and mentoring little Johnny instead.
Darklady says
Ryan — Explain to me how forcing a specific kind of content into a single sTLD isn’t censorship, please, especially when you’re talking about allowing governments to filter the content.
One of the reasons that people who deal with explicit sexual material don’t like .xxx is because so many people think that shoving whatever they personally consider pornographic into that area for easy filtering is a good idea.
And if that happens… what goes into .xxx? Planned Parenthood? Breast cancer sites? GLBT blogs?
I’ve never fully understood why seeing a naked body or even a naked body in sexual motion supposedly has a corrosive effect on kids. I think it’s adults who have more of a problem with it, to be honest — and if you want to make it easy for kids to find that material, stick it all in an easy to remember URL.
BTW — for more on this subject, feel free to visit http://www.DotXXXOpposition.com
Jim Davies says
With the whole self-interested new gTLD circus upon us, it is more important than ever that due process with .jobs is followed.
Otherwise, the message from ICANN will be “apply with whatever restrictions you need to get over the line, then change the terms of reference later at will”. That can’t be right.
If .jobs wants the domain on a substantially different basis, then it should be made to re-apply in a competitive tender for the extension.
@Kevin – you are spot on, it is a great extension. As such, it should not be handed over on new terms without giving other people the chance to apply for it.
Steve M says
This improper push from the .jobs should not happen. As Jim D. @ #6 above says, they shouldn’t get more later than they asked for originally.
They want an “open” .jobs? Fine; put the extension up for auction and make them fight for it.
Reminds me of a local dog-lovers group that finally got our city–after many years of trying–to convert what was a park for all people into a fenced-off dog-park.
The problem was they got approval from the city council by agreeing to a no-lights park (because there’s many houses near the park which would have been subject to these high-intensity, stadium-type lights).
Well guess what; a few years after getting their no-lights dog park; they came back to the city council begging to have lights, “’cause by time we’re home from work in the winter, it’s too late (dark) to take our dogs out.”
You can guess what happened.
Yup; the city caved and put in lights.