07-10-2010, 05:29 AM
|
|
|
Confirmed User
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks.
Posts: 4,790
|
Quote:
Stuart Wrote:
Policy Making and IFFOR
IFFOR will be tasked with setting the policies for .XXX. Details can be found at www.iffor.org. This is an independent entity from ICM and will be funded through contract with ICM to the tune of $10 per registration per year. We estimate now that we will launch with between 300,000-500,000 names so that would translate into $3-$5 million a year for IFFOR. With annual operating costs of approximately $500,000 a year, substantial monies will be available for IFFOR to donate, sponsor and fund whatever initiatives it feels appropraite .We envisage a range of initiatives being considered, including but not limited to: health and safety of Adult industry workers, legal challenges facing the industry such as 2257, piracy, counterfeiting, onerous legislation etc, labeling initiatives, combating child abuse, parental awareness etc.
The Policy Advisory Board of IFFOR will be a nine person Board with 5 seats going directly to Adult Industry Representatives from around the world with ICM, Privacy and Security, Free Speech and Child Protection Advocates each getting an additional seat. The Adult industry will have a majority representation on this Board . . .
IFFOR will operate in an open and transparent manner and will solicit comment and feedback on its activities from its sponsored community and other impacted stakeholders.
FSC?s Reply
I?ve had several discussions with Stuart about .xxx, and in one conversation, I asked him why he didn?t just apply for the gTLD. His response was ?Because, with a sTLD, we can decide who is in and who is out.? The ?we? I assumed to be IFFOR. While he has seats slated for ?adult? professionals, the Board selection process and who is on the nominating committee is unclear. Who will Lawley place in that seat? Greg Dumas? Greg owns an adult registry. That?s true. But has he or will he act in the best interest of the industry or will he continue to act in his own and ICM?s best interests?
Moreover, why would we and how can we believe that IFFOR will act in a transparent manner when this application process has been anything but. Again, if Stuart wants to give us an example of transparency?all he has to do is show us his list of supporters. It really is quite simple.
Let me be perfectly clear folks--IT?S NOT OVER YET! If .xxx were a done-deal, Stuart would not be arguing his case on this board. The ICANN Board has created some significant hurdles for ICM to overcome and FSC has every intention of fully exploiting the opportunities that those hurdles present. We will continue to work to defeat this adult industry albatross.
There is much that we can and must do. As Collin so astutely pointed out in his post, this network is no longer a secure place for FSC to strategize with its members or to communicate its ?calls to action.? So, please watch your ?inbox? and the other boards and forums--there is much more to come.
|
No Fear, Just Knowledge. |
|
|