Could the USA force all porn sites onto .xxx domain?
<p>I've been working on various methods to block content from my home network and realizing all the holes in my schemes.  But it occurred to me that it would be pretty simple if all the porn was on .xxx because then I could just force all network traffic on my network to use my DNS server never serve out the name for something that resolves to .xxx (I know this doesn't solve the "safe search" problem, but one thing at a time)</p>

<p>But I was talking with my wife about it and we were wondering if or why it might be a non-starter to lobby my Congressperson to do that.  It doesn't seem to me that the tld is tantamount to free speech, you can't get a .edu or .gov tld if you <em>aren't</em> associated with those orgs, couldn't you be forced to have a .xxx tld if you <em>are</em> associated with certain organizations?</p>

<p><strong>Can you unambiguously, legally, and conclusively determine what is and is not a "porn site"?</strong><br>
I'm sure many are easy... but what about that "Swimsuit modeling" site, or the "Artistic Nudes" site featuring classic French Renaissance paintings?  There will always be a grey area.</p>

<p><strong>What makes a "site" in a legal sense?</strong><br>
Consider all the blog sites filled with user generated content:  If just a few pages out of tens-of-thousands are hardcore, indisputable porn, would you require the entire domain to be classified XXX, even if 99% of its content is completely innocent?</p>

<p><strong>Who would enforce this?</strong><br>
Are you proposing an "Internet Police" force to review all new domain names and their content <em>before</em> they get approved?  That is called "Prior Restraint on Free Speech", and is established law.<br></p>

<p>Suppose a site does get approved, then immediately changes the content of their pages from Cooking Recipes to hard-core porn.  Who is going to review and approve every update to every website, when sites are updated constantly?!</p>

<p>Maybe you're proposing that any individual who finds porn on a .ORG site has the right to sue for damages? This would likely clog the courts with endless vigilante lawsuits about what content belongs on which domain.</p>

<p><strong>This is a flat out horrible, poorly thought out idea.</strong></p>

<p>I think such a law would be hard to sustain against a constitutional challenge in the US. First of all, who would be charged with determining if a given site was "a porn site" required to use an .XXX domain. That might get into a whole host of "censorship" issues.</p>

<p>Such a domain would be a form of labeling, and thus at least arguably a form of compelled speech. By making it easy to filter out such sites, it arguably denies them participation in a public forum based on their content.</p>

<p>Also, existing domain/site names have been treated as a form of property, and so there might be eminent domain issues when a site has spent significant resources in promoting a given URL.</p>

<p>But the only way to know for sure would be for such a law to be passed and then challenged in court. I predict that no such law will be passed in the first place, but I've been surprised by Congress before.</p>

united-states internet constitutional-law