DirectNIC Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs

[Dave_Z]

Whew, looks kinda extreme:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/FSCView.asp?coid=1014

In a move that could indicate further scrutiny by domain registrars, directNIC has demanded that TGP operator SlicksNetwork.com hand over model IDs on all performers it suspects are underage.

In an email sent by Intercosmos, directNIC’s parent company, and obtained by XBIZ, law clerk Juli Silver Green requested that SlicksNetwork.com submit all state issued photo IDs that clearly show the face and date of birth of the models.

Green threatened the site with closure if the site’s publisher doesn’t comply by Dec. 18. DirectNIC imposed a lock on the domains it alleges have questionable content, preventing the owner from transferring them to another registrar.

SlicksNetwork.com’s owner Slick said that directNIC does not host his sites, it just serves as the registrar. SlicksNetwork.com contains 14 TGP sites that link to sponsor programs.

First Amendment attorney and Free Speech Coalition Chairman Jeffrey Douglas said the ID request is unprecedented, and more importantly, a violation of privacy laws. According to Douglas, the request is illegal, and also could have a chilling effect on the free speech of webmasters that deal in legal teen content.

“This is a blatant and absolute violation of privacy laws,” Douglas told XBIZ. “There’s absolutely no legal liability for the registrar if underage models appear on a website. DirectNIC is an officious intermeddler.”

Upon receiving a complaint of child pornography, there are legal courses of action for directNIC to take, Douglas said. Since it has no legal right to obtain personally identifiable information from the website’s models, the company should have alerted the proper legal authorities, but instead it decided to take the law into its own hands.

DirectNIC's legal fine prints give a hint what they'd do for such things. Time will
tell how this will turn out.

This should be interesting.

 

[Mark]

They complain because it isn't the "host" - but the registrar doing the policing here .... But if were going to have these laws for Porn , We do need someone to take it upon themselves to check IMO. Especially when it comes to the supposed use of underage/minor Models.

 

[Ronald Regging]

I can see their point about reporting it to the authorities. We pay good money in taxes to have professional law enforcement people who specialize in handling these types of cases. It seems a bit ridiculous for people to take the law into their own hands. I agree, if they are dealing in child porn, it should be shut down, but there are proper avenues to be taken. And I imagine if this guy was dealing in child porn, the last thing he would be doing is fighting this and drawing attention to this fact, unless he wants to end up in jail.

Think of this as well... How does this make DirectNIC look, when they're only course of action against a supposed child porn dealer is to suspend their domains?? Thats like finding a murderer and instead of reporting him to the police, you merely take his gun away from him and send him on his way... They had a duty to report this to the authorities who would perform a proper investigation. They severely dropped the ball here IMO.

 

[IAmAllanShore]

My main issue with it is actually the fact that it gives yet another party access to government issued ID's, and directnic doesn't really seem to have a dog in the fight...

If they thought something was amiss, they should contact the authorities and/or hosting provider.

I'm a big time supporter of anything that prevents underage exploitation, but this seems to be an actor speaking out of turn rather than anything particularly useful.

If I'm wrong, do tell me :tu:

-Allan :gl:

 

[labrocca]

I just wonder if this is a ploy to steal lucrative domains. Directnic has no right to police the internet.