The Hindu Business Line : The light stays red

The controversial issue of whether to create a distinctive domain for pornographic Web sites has cropped up once again. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the non-profit organisation that oversees domain names and IP addresses, has once again rejected the proposal to create `.xxx' domain for porn sites.

ICANN's latest move is, in fact, a reversal of its earlier decision last June to give preliminary approval for the .xxx domain. ICANN's volte-face has irked ICM Registry, a company that would implement the .xxx domain for a fee.

It has launched an all-out effort to resurrect the domain name by launching a campaign. But more than porn, .xxx domain brings to fore the question whether ICANN is an independent agency to monitor Internet domains or it is being influenced by the US Government, as alleged by many countries.

For nearly six years, the issue of creating a separate domain for adult sites has existed. The first bid to create the domain was out in 2000. ICM Registry resubmitted its bid in 2004 with some changes, but the board of ICANN felt that the `language of the proposed contract was vague,' ICANN's Chief, Paul Twomey, was quoted as saying.

For and against

Should there be a separate domain for adult sites? As it is, the Net is full of them, and no parents these days would want their children to surf the Internet unsupervised. Those who oppose the .xxx domain are of the view that creating a separate domain will only add to the issue of rampant Internet porn. Since there is no law that makes it mandatory for adult sites to use the .xxx domain, creating it will only add yet another channel for sleaze, they argue. Another point of view is that the domain will only help legitimise pornography on the Net.

Surprisingly, even the porn industry opposes the .xxx domain. Some porn sites say the .xxx domain would make it easier for governments to ban or filter such sites. On the other hand, proponents of the .xxx domain say it would help control Internet pornography better. Having a separate domain would help parents and employers to completely block such sites and this is a far more effective way than using the existing content-filtering methods.

If ICM Registry manages to get global support for its allegation that ICANN's decision was influenced by the US, it may further reopen the issue of who should control Internet domains. When the United Nations organised the World Summit on Information Societies (WSIS) last year in Tunisia, one issue that dominated the event was Internet governance. Many developing countries and the European Union had demanded that the UN or a body such as the International Telecom Union (ITU) should have more say in matters related to overseeing the Internet. However, it was decided at the WSIS not to alter the way in which the Internet is now governed, leaving the role of ICANN intact. It would be interesting to see whether porn would rekindle the issue of Internet governance.

vipin@thehindu.co.in