The issue is simple. ICANN's job is to coordinate the top level of the domain name space. Full stop. If someone puts forward a technically credible application for a .xxx TLD and no one else has it, then they should get an exclusive assignment. People who want ICANN to refuse to create a TLD because of its meaning or content, or because of speculation that its meaning might trigger political and legal effects they disapprove of, are asking ICANN to broaden its mission to make inappropriate policy judgments. They are, in effect, asking ICANN to act as a content regulator. That's wrong. It's particularly troublesome when this position is espoused by people who think of themselves as freedom-loving opponents of censorship. They seem to be trying to advance a "libertarian" cause by forcibly preventing web site suppliers from clearly and voluntarily identifying themselves as porn, and they are preventing users from benefiting from that self-identification, either to find or avoid the adult content. What kind of freedom is this?

Yes, many of them say they are against content regulation of the Internet and fear that a porn TLD will play into the hands of censors. As Weinstein puts it:

"Unlike other "topic-specific" TLDs like dot-jobs or dot-travel, the existence of dot-ex-ex-ex is likely to create a political and litigious firestorm over time, as various government entities move to try force "adult" sites into the new domain space, and battles erupt over what an adult site is defined to be."

This argument shows just how insulated these folks are from legal and political reality. I mean, where has LW been since 1996? Ever heard of the CDA? COPA? There have already been monumental battles over how obscenity on the Internet is defined, and many, many efforts to regulate it, not just in the US but globally. Most of the US efforts have been struck down by the US Supreme Court on grounds that would apply equally well to any effort to force all explicit web sites, not to mention health web sites, into a specific TLD.

The point is, if governments or the "religious right" want to go after porn or naked bodies on the Internet, they don't need .xxx to do it.

More generally, we've all got to get away from the notion that TLD creation is a beauty contest that invites everyone in the world to ruminate on whether they think the world would be a better place if the TLD application is successful. Somewhere in this world, at this moment, someone is registering a domain name. Maybe it's xxx in the second level. Do you want your registrar or registry jumping into the middle of this process and asking, "hey what do you plan to do with this domain?" or, "hey, what will be the long term consequences for free expression if we permit you to register that name?" Does that kind of prior restraint sound like a good idea? The Internet functions just fine without it, in my opinion.