3 ms·

Case law over domain names, domain registrars and such is very thorough. You'd be surprised how much regulation and existing cases concern domain names and regi

• bdcravens 14y ago
  Isn't that when there's a distinct naming concern, where a specific entity is target? JaneDoeNude.com or YCombinatorSucks.com are obvious. TeXXXan.com is generic, and an alteration of a word that describes 20+ million people. Adult websites however are bound by federal law (18 USC 2257) requiring signed releases by all "models". Websites like Texxxan.com are in obvious violation of this, and bordering on organized crime. The problem is suing both may cause the entire thing to be dismissed. (IANAL)
  • mdasen 14y ago
    The requirement of a signed release doesn't seem to apply to user-posted content. The requirement applies to sites considered to be the producer of the content. For example, if this requirement were enforceable against user-posted content, online adult personals wouldn't be legal. A little quick Googling finds me the Stranger's adult personals disclaimer: http://thestranger.selectalternatives.com/gyrobase/adult http://thestranger.selectalternatives.com/gyrobase/adult. According to 18 USC section 2257, you aren't considered a producer if you are limited to things like photo or film processing, digitization, distribution, an ISP, etc. (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257). Similarly, IANAL, but it seems that adult sites have a certain amount of protection for user-posted content similar to YouTube's copyright safe harbor.