Adult .IE Domain Names Banned As Immoral 509
An anonymous reader writes, "The Irish domain prefix, .ie, is controlled by an organization called the IE Domain Registry. In their terms and conditions they state, 'The proposed domain name must not be offensive or contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality.' But this policy is only applied to sex words as this adult webmaster has discovered. Murder.ie is acceptable, Porn.ie is not. Can a word be immoral? And in this day and age, should a government-chosen domain registry be allowed to enforce their own moral code on the public?"
Yes? So.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Isn't this standard procedure for most country TLDs? I just checked for my country:
From their webpage: [www.dns.lu]
Translation: The proposed domain name must not be offensive or contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality
Thus, identical to the Ireland registry provisions. The real question here is, why someone would consider "murder" falling into that provision? I clearly don't. You see, this could be a website about prevening murder, or a forum for people seeking help that had a relative murdered. I don't know.
Also keep in mind that pretty much all "normal" sex-related words should be registrable just because of *that* reason. tits.com used to be about birds (the real, flying kind). Now, I do not know what the porn guy exactly tried to register (just checked the article: it was porn.ie). It would be hard to defend "bondagegirls.ie", but a case for "sex.ie" might be acceptable, if the content clearly is non-sexual. (Well, the applicant was a p0rn peddler, so good luck to that)
Oh, and I see he owns sex.ie... Now really, it's not as if sex.ie is registrable, so should be murder.ie.... He is complaining about nothing *at all*.
What I think that happens: the registration process is completely automated and the words just pass through an automated filter which, incidentially, just contains sex-related words. He should try "t1ts.ie" ;-)
You miss the point ... (Score:2, Interesting)
The truth of the matter is that if enough people didn't like it, they wouldn't sell enough domains to stay profitable, and they would be forced to change.
I'm sure this concept will be completely foreign to the socialist minions here on Slashdot, but that's how capitalism works. Your business, your terms. Government run or not, that's the way it is. If you don't like it, go buy a domain name somewhere else, and stop whining. Nobody is trying to oppress you, they just don't want their registry polluted with filth.
Re:A rose by any other name... (Score:5, Interesting)
Except for, you know, the idea that we should be free to do whatever the hell we want, so long as we're not harming others. I know freedom (and liberalism) in general is out of favour these days, but still...
don't force those who adminsiter and check these to suffer your personal tastes, and don't cry foul by their decisions. That is what pisses me off.
So we should all suffer YOUR personal tastes? Or should we go with "majority rules" here, and fuck anyone who disagrees with the majority?
Meet Bob, he had the same rights as everyone. One day he fucked a watermelon, and loved it. Now he felt that he didn't have the same rights as everyone else and started a campaign for 'equal rights' and 'tolerance'
And so long as Bob isn't harming a soul while fucking watermelons, what precisely is the problem? If he's prevented by law from doing that, he damned well SHOULD campaign for equal rights and tolerance.
I think your poorly-veiled allusion to gay rights, plus your use of quotation marks around 'equal rights' and 'tolerance' speaks volumes about your position, though. You do realize that without 'equal rights', it's just as easy for someone to find something about you that is slightly different than the majority, and get after you about it?
Re:A rose by any other name... (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally, I think that the one who is the kooky one is the one who thinks that disagreeing with censorship is equivalent to being a fundamentalist. That's just my opinion though...
Here's a decent definition of censorship: The practice of suppressing a text or part of a text that is considered objectionable according to certain standards.
This is censorship. They aren't self-governing rules - they are striking specific sites simply because they find the name morally objectionable. This is a government, not a simple administrator. This is governmental censorship. Look at the argument. You can now form your opinion and feel free to disagree or agree, but definitions of words are definitions of words.
While we're getting to the definition of words, I didn't know that the majority would agree. I'm not sure you know either - you should probably write "guess".
Now I'm still not sure what the fuck having sex with a watermelon has to do with this issue...
Re:A rose by any other name... (Score:2, Interesting)
Censorship isn't censorship when it's "self governing"? What? And how is this self-governing? It's being enforced by a private company, not by the people.
"Of course the rule can't be wrong, simply because it isn't quite as strict as a the rules in an arbitrarily chosen survival camp!" A truly masterful point. Arg, how did you come up with this?
Oh, and there's nothing wrong with keeping society prim, proper, polite and personable. So if you want to drop the "f word" in a post, then feel free, but don't cry foul when I mod you down for it, and don't force those who administer you to suffer your personal tastes.
Re:A rose by any other name... (Score:3, Interesting)
This has very little to do with freedom to be honest. It's their tld, they've setup the rules. Don't agree with them, buy a .com name.
No, you should suffer the Terms Of Service of the registrar, like the ones many tld's enforce. Don't like it? Write to the registrar, then write to the government, after failing to yield results just buy the damned .com .
No problem for me. Hell, if Bob wants to enjoy his watermelons that way, or if he is gay, as long as he's not bothering me, have fun and safe sex (or not). But if the Irish tld organization doesn't want to sell him a domainname, it's their right. It's their service, and they have a TOS up that warns you about this.
Equal rights and tolerance are just arguments you'd use when you're disciminating against specific groups of people (homosexuals, race, ethnic groups, etc), in this case no pornography is allowed at all. Not heterosexual, not homosexual, not interracial, not interspecies, just plain old NOTHING. While I don't agree with the fact that you can't open a porn site under .ie (after all, what the world really needs is more porn on the internet), it's their tld. Buy a .com name if you don't agree.
Sit Down Young Lad (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah it's all true. Playboy was Illegal, along with condoms and being homosexual until 1993. Yes 1993. Prior to thise, people were still selling playboys, condonms and being homosexual, but it was in fact illegal. We don't actually have an explicit right to freedom of speech in this country. In the Irish constitution, most if not all personal rights are, to use the exact phrase, "subject to public order and morality". Oy'veh!
Anyway, it's not like that over here anymore. Long story short, people got relatively wealthy and now have the money to be as debauched and decandent as they like, hence the laws got changed. The current Taoiseach of the country, that's the Prime Minister, is divorced and living with his girlfriend. Or he was at any rate, while still Taoiseach. He might have married her. Might. So no we are not currently talking about a conservative catholic theocracy anymore. Because it was a conservative catholic theocracy at one point. I've got witnesses who can testify to that.
However! There's still a lot of old guard catholic dead wood hanging around. The kind who thought that Vatican II was an opening of the floodgates of sin. They're here and there, usually in minor offical positions that they obtained through their connections to government. "Pillars of the Community" had a lot of government connections over here, mostly because everyone else had emigrated.
Anyway, these kind of officals tend not only to be catholics, they are very often members of some subversive catholic organisation like Opus Dei or the Knights of Columbanus. I believe the attoreny general in the infamous X case [wikipedia.org] was a member of the latter. Think Pat Robertson, only without the TV show. Trust me, these guys are the real pros, Robertson's just a wannabe.
Anyway, it's highly likely that someone of that ilk is running the
Re:Yes? So.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Translated:
Yes, according to the DENIC anale-penetration.de is completely valid. However, the registration can be rejected if it would be obviously illegal - which is not the case with porn.
Re:juden-raus.ie (Score:3, Interesting)
If you don't see the west's double standards in treating Jews and Arabs let me refresh you memory; People get sent to jail for challenging the accuracy of the Holocaust figures, yet freedom of speech in invoked everytime someone gratuitousely insults the prophet Mohammed and his teachings. Israel gets away with a stockpile of nukes but no Arab country could dream of being allowed to develop them. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying we should question how many people died in the Holocaust or allow for proliferation of WMDs. I'm merely pointing out the things Jews get away with.
To quote Henry Kissinger: "a people who have been persecuted for 2000 years must be doing something wrong."
Kissinger is Jewish himself.
Re:Murder or Porn (Score:3, Interesting)
If women were told that they couldn't work any job, but porn, then you'd have a better argument.
The next time you see a guy breaking his back working shit labor, ask yourself if he's sure he wants to be there. This is, essentially, the trafficking of human beings.
Watch everything you buy. You don't know where it came from.
We should make buying shoes illegal; I hear that the people who are forced to make them don't have any alternatives. It's essentially slavery.
Re:juden-raus.ie (Score:4, Interesting)
Ironically, your post illustrates my point; There's no way to have an intelligent debate when one of the parties dares to say that Jews don't have a monopoly over suffering. Emotions quickly take over and the word "anti-semite" is used as a wildcard. Wrong! I grew up in a country with a firmly rooted Jewish community. Early on, I learned to judge people based on what they do, not who they are. This wasn't the case for many of the bullies which agressed Jews for religious reasons. I was beaten up many times because I tried to defend the Jews. So, you agree that the west isn't accepting mainstream Arab culture? Ok, that was too easy.
The west is backing those same countries making any change of regime very hard. I can only back that claim with my own experience.
I don't blame the Jews for anything. Heck, I know most people in Israel are against the massacre the IDF is perpetrating.
I'm not gullible enough to believe in an organised racist conspiracy. Yet, I recognize a genocide when I see one; And the Israeli government is responsible for it. Granted, the Arab leaders are jerks and should have acknowledged Israel's right to exist early on but there are not actively responsible for the victims. Indeed you can. But you'd be wrong again. I live in Sweden ('cause of all the blondes and pirates). It was originally quoted in a book by Walter Isaacson, "Kissinger - A Biography", on page 561.
Re:juden-raus.ie (Score:1, Interesting)
I remember a rabbi in Israel saying how the decorative tree used
reminds him of a swastika.
My point? Every effing nation has racists.
Some racist idealogies we tolerate, some we dont.
We make fun of some cults and their stupids beliefs but other cults are untouchables...(something about god liking them more than other cults) because of the Pavlovian reflex we have instilled in people on the subject.
Moses or Xenu, there is NO difference, yet making fun of one will put you in jail and the other will put you on a talk show.
Please niggah, dont act like you care.
Re:juden-raus.ie (Score:3, Interesting)