Stuart Lawley is trying to get his .xxx brainchild revived again with an independent appeal. Some people just don’t like to hear the word “no.”
http://www.xbiz.com/news/95529
Michael
oh, my FUCKING god - .XXX again???
omg - can you believe this guy? .xxx doesn’t bring a single thing to the party, and neither the christians nor the adult industry support it at all - and now he’s at it again. when he wrote to me about it, it seemed like the ONLY thing his company had to offer was educating parents, and there is no need for a new TLD to do that.
argh!
WASHINGTON â Stuart Lawley is trying to resurrect .XXX. Lawley’s organization, ICM Registry, saw its application to enable the top-level domain .XXX killed back in March after three years and millions of dollars spent.
Lawley posted on the ICM Registry homepage that his company has filed a petition for an independent review of ICANN’s decision.
Online guru Brandon “Fight The Patent” told XBIZ that the petition, even if it led to an independent review, would likely achieve the same result for Lawley: rejection.
“He’s trying to cry foul that ICANN jerked him along until the very end and got him the thumbs-down vote on .XXX,” he said. “He’s also working the angle that the Department of Commerce put in their strong-arm of government to prevent .XXX from going through.”
During the struggle to make .XXX a reality, the ICM Registry filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed against the Department of Commerce, accusing the agency of working behind the scenes to kill .XXX. A federal judge ruled against ICM.
In the announcement, Lawley complained that ICANN denied him the business he would have gained from the addition of the .XXX top-level domain.
“ICM has been wrongfully denied the opportunity to operate the proposed .XXX [top-level domain] and gain the significant ‘first mover’ business advantage that would have flowed from its registry contract for what has always been regarded as one of the more sought after and popular expected new [top-level domain],” the announcement reads. “Further, ICANN’s rejection of ICM’s application has denied the benefits the [top-level domain] would have provided to the sponsored community and other stakeholders, namely, empowering individuals wishing to select or avoid such adult content websites to do so easily and establishing a forum for the online adult entertainment community to communicate and proactively respond to the needs and concerns of the broader Internet community.”
source: http://www.xbiz.com/news/95529
Re: .XXX Revised Again?
I suppose when you’ve invested millions in an idea, it’s difficult to just let it go because someone or some group said, “No.” But good grief. The only one who wants it is Lawley.
Can you imagine how much they’ll be charging for domain names just to recuperate their millions.
Michael
Re: oh, my FUCKING god - .XXX again???
Well said.
Re: .XXX Revised Again?
What a piece of shit. But then again, I’m not the least bit surprised. He doesn’t give a crap about anyone in the industry, about Christians, or about children. All he wants is to make a ton of money, and rumors persist about backdoor deals with a bunch of major straight companies who supported .xxx to ICANN (in letters that ICANN refuses to make public) in exchange for quiet preassignment of choice domain names before release to anyone else.
Of course, no proof that’s true, but people like Lawley will stop at nothing to try to push their agenda, particularly when there’s so much money to be made.
Re: .XXX Revised Again?
OMG, I just read his comments in the Xbiz article. The guy is such a sleazebag. He has publicly stated many times that (at least according to him), .xxx will NEVER become mandatory… but in the xbiz article, he says:
namely, empowering individuals wishing to select or avoid such adult content websites to do so easily and establishing a forum for the online adult entertainment community to communicate and proactively respond to the needs and concerns of the broader Internet community."
So how is .xxx going to allow anyone to “easily… avoid such adult content websites” unless it’s mandatory?