ICM Registry tells Xbiz FUCK YOU
 

from www.mikesouth.com

Remember how Stuart Lawley was blowing smoke out his ass about how .xxx domains would be protected from obvious cyber squatting? Xbiz even helped Lawley bring .XXX to reality and they accepted his ads.

So how does this peice of shit return the favor? Take a look at who owns XBiz.xxx:

Domain ID:D225342-XXX
Domain Name:XBIZ.XXX
Created On:06-Dec-2011 17:03:11 UTC
Last Updated On:04-Feb-2012 21:20:52 UTC
Expiration Date:06-Dec-2012 17:03:11 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Mesh Digital Limited (R3228-XXX)
Status:CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:MESHDM-263416
Registrant Name:W Ter Maat
Registrant Organization:
Registrant Street1:Het Buske 11
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Lent
Registrant State/Province:Gelderland
Registrant Postal Code:6663 KP
Registrant Country:NL
Registrant Phone:+31.647826158
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:

Hmmm that doesn't look like Helmy to me... So XBiz got a big fuck you from Stuart Lawley....that tells you everything you need to know about that douche bag Stuart Lawley right there. Tell ICM Registry, Stormy Daniels and Nina Mercedez to go fuck themselves and DIAF.

deze domeinnaam is te koop: [email protected]

Don't even get me started on fucking .xxx no one wanted it, no one needed it..

It's just fucked up all the way around.. And I have said for years, nothing good will come from it..

No point to bother about domain extension which almost nobody buying it.

yeah that tld never lasted long...

Thanks Mike, good scoop:thumbsup

Cybersquatting (also known as domain squatting), according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith. The intent is to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The cybersquatter offers to sell the domain to the person who owns a trademark contained within the name at an inflated price. Sounds like the wrong thing to do.

Nice way to show your love ...

OK ya'll I just got a call from XBiz and they said that they have never supported .xxx nor have they accepted an ad for .xxx

I recall myself having quite the flame war with Helmy over this very topic does anyone know if he supported .xxx publicly or not or if XBiz has accepted any ads from ICMR or anyone selling .xxx

Id look myself but I am not on their comp list....thanks guys

I do not recall Alec ever saying he was pro-.xxx, in fact, I have only heard the opposite. I don't recall seeing .xxx ads anywhere on any XBIZ stuff I have seen.

Wonder how this is going to pan out??

Baddog I think Helmys support was more implicit than explicit, for example is his org ASACP getting money from ICMR? I know at one time that was the deal. I also thought that I read that XBiz was taking ads from ICMR. I also know that XBiz gave Lawley a voice at XBiz.net to support his views on .xxx

I called him out on these things IIRC and commented that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its a fucking duck...

:1orglaugh

Hi Mike,

Your statement regarding ASACP is in fact not correct.

ASACP has never accepted a single penny from ICM/.XXX/IFFOR. ASACP has no relationship, whatsoever, with ICM/.XXX/IFFOR, period.

Yes, there have been offers in the past but I made the decision not to support or work with ICM/.XXX/IFFOR.

Also to set the record straight Alec is not involved in the daily operations of ASACP or the ASACP Foundation. Alec is the founder of ASACP, a member of the board of directors and an advisory council member. Alec has a voice as do the other members of the board, AC, and sponsors/members but ultimately these decisions are mine and mine alone.

Founded in 1996, ASACP is a non-profit organization dedicated to online child protection.
ASACP is comprised of two separate corporate entities, the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection and the ASACP Foundation. The Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP) is a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization. ASACP manages a membership program that provides resources to adult entertainment companies in order to help them protect children online. The ASACP Foundation is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. The ASACP Foundation battles child pornography through its CP Reporting Hotline and helps parents prevent children from viewing age-restricted material online with its Restricted To Adults (RTA) website label (www.rtalabel.org). ASACP has invested nearly 16 years in developing progressive programs to protect children, and its relationship in assisting and advocating for the adult industry?s child protection efforts is unparalleled.

If you have any further questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me directly.

Best,

Tim Henning
Executive Director
ASACP

The issue I recall was people saying Lawley referenced a poll at xbiz being used to show industry support for the extension.

One would have thought that xbiz would have registered that domain themselves.

And from what I could see, it was based on the fact that ICM said they would give $10 from every registration to helping kids. Naturally, those that did not like Helmy or XBIZ immediately said that it was ASACP that was getting it when that had NEVER been said by anyone that had a clue. Just speculators.

Precisely. Especially if they were as pro-.xxx as people here made them out to be. If anything, I think this proves people's assumptions were nothing more than that.

If asacp didnt help lawley please explain joan irving being a part of IFFOR

coincidence...BULLSHIT

perhaps, joan used ASACP in a self serving manner ?:2 cents:

may i remind everyone at the time she wrote this joan was executive director of asacp

http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-xxx/msg00061.html

Allow me to quote

ASACP has been in negotiations with the International Foundation for Online
Responsibility (IFFOR) and ICM for it to serve as a hotline for reviewing
reports of suspected child pornography and to carry out the secondary
monitoring of .xxx sites for child pornography.

I applaud IFFOR and ICM Registry's initiative to integrate tools and
technology of finding and reporting child pornography websites into their
proposed registry application to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN).

I also support the online adult industry developing their own credible
business practices in conjunction with other impacted stakeholders and
support the IFFOR initiative to create a line of communication between the
adult industry and the global community.


Sincerely,


Joan Irvine
Executive Director
ASACP

Hi Mike,

Regarding Joan Irvine and her decision to take the job of Executive Director of IFFOR and resign from her position at ASACP I can't speak to her motivations or actions, only she can do that.

As I stated ASACP has never accepted a single penny from ICM/.XXX/IFFOR. ASACP has no relationship, whatsoever, with ICM/.XXX/IFFOR, period.

Yes, there have been offers in the past but I made the decision not to support or work with ICM/.XXX/IFFOR.

Best,

Tim Henning
Executive Director
ASACP

OK I see you were for it then but against it now....maybe a bid for congress is in yer future LOL

Rogue employee, duh.

The point is I cant come in and rewrite history ASACP CLEARLY supported .XXX whether it was tim or joan or bambi. Now maybe they dont now but you can't come in here and say we never did, it simply makes you look like you are obfuscating.

Why is it all the orgs in this biz FSC included, shout it wasn't me when they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar?

Heres some advice tim...."We fucked up....it happens, we try to keep it to a minimum. We will do everything in our power to erase this scourge from our industry"

and say it like you mean it.

Perhaps . . . if she had a crystal ball when she took the position.

Where does it say they took money? And wouldn't it make sense that ASACP support the theory that ICM was promoting (child protection) at the time or offer their hotline service that was already in place?

I know this was not addressed to me, but what scourge? Lawley? ICM? .XXX? CP? Something else?

I say, Baddog and Mike South in a Cage Match @ the Xbiz Miami show:thumbsup:thumbsup

Jeff Sparxxx can be the referee. :1orglaugh

baddog would beat me like a drum right now...Im on a walker...broke my leg (tibia plateau) three months ago. just now able to start physical therapy and get out of a wheelchair

besides I like Baddog even when he is wrong LOL

and for the record lawley .xxx and icmr ae the scourge to which I was referring cp is a different scourge

sorry to hear that:winkwink:

he did too. not to mention the accsp or whatever thing he runs gets a kick back per domain.
ds

I really think that is out of the realm of ASACP's charter. :2 cents:

Sorry to hear it. How did you do that?

Really? How much and how is it that you know this when apparently Tim is unaware?

Mike,

There was no blowing of smoke (or sunshine for that matter) with regard to ICM Registry?s stance on cybersquatting. We have been quite diligent in enforcing our documented policies (http://icm.xxx/policies/ please see specifically the top links for Domain Name Dispute Resolution) when circumstances have proven patterns of widespread or serial registrations with ill intent. You can read about that here.

http://www.thedomains.com/2011/12/13...ngtonpost-xxx/

With regard to XBIZ particularly, they did not apply to register xbiz.xxx in any of the pre-launch periods, (sunrise, founders, or landrush) and are more than welcome to file for RES, (the Rapid Evaluation Service that we have been highly commended for, and the National Arbitration Forum has published stats for just yesterday that you can see here http://www.adrforum.com/newsroom.aspx?itemID=1709 which show takedowns take an average of two days) CEDRP or UDRP.

While we understand that this situation mat be not ideal for XBIZ, this registrant does not appear to have engaged in serial cybersquatting, and for all we know may have some legitimate rights in the name (as others clearly have). We cannot take unilateral action, without due process in this circumstance under our own cybersquatting policies. The rules are there, and we must abide by them too.

For the record, (as I?ve said here before) XBIZ will not take our advertising. (Which is a shame, really ? because we would love the opportunity to work with them to deliver relevant, clear and factual information about our company and our product.)

Oh ? and by the way, you?ll be more than welcome to apply for mikesouth.xxx the moment we roll out the performer program. You can see that it?s clearly part of the program by looking at the Registrant Name section of the whois for that domain. Any and every name that is currently being held in a performer escrow account was placed there to ensure that the only people that had the ability to register those names, were, in fact, the performer/professional listed.

How is it that ICM can take unilateral action with respect to performer names, but ICM cannot take unilateral action with respect to existing marks and names other than performer names?

You mention the possibility that the registrant of XBIZ.xxx "may have some legitimate rights in the name;" is it inconceivable that an individual or company other than the performer himself/herself might have some legitimate rights to those names?

How can you have it both ways?

In some instances, stage names of a given performer might actually be the registered trademark of a third-party, btw. Was any consideration given to that possibility when ICM created the performer program?

GO Q :thumbsup

Yes dotxxx you say you protect against cybersquatting but you assholes are using MY good name to sell your fucking shit product, as well as those of jessejane, stoya, kaydenkross and others.

all I can say at this point is fuck you you piece of shit...you WILL answer for it.

Who cares, not like if someone had mikesouth.me it would matter or benefit from your .com domain.

Everyone knows .xxx is simply another inferior domain extension designed to collect money from the public.