The sooner the US loses control over the internet the better.
you say this as you type it on an American-run website.
Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
161–170 of 323 posts
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more like the government of Hungry or Bulgaria in the EU analogy.
Texas isn't like a small corrupt country. It's like a big corrupt important country, like Germany. If it was small and corrupt it would be ignorable.
They're a small corrupt country.
The only thing slightly redeem about about them economic wise is their gas reserves. The way they run their state is very similar to a corrupt nation as well. They still want to break away from the US.
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Stuart Lawley, the CEO of ICM Registry--the company behind the XXX top level domains, says XXX sites should help empower parents to keep their kids away from adult content. https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/man-behind-xxx-domains-say...
Well that's kinda the whole idea of having an "adult content" tld; it's so you can block all .xxx domains instead of having to create a blocklist of sites. Like an opt-in nsfw flag for the internet, basically.
Sure but that doesn't really work with the existing age verification laws. Unless .xxx is requiring domains to implement age verification or there's some sort of global redirect to a verification portal, that site is back in the same legal jeopardy of having Texas confiscate their domain again.
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#164The idea that a state court in one particular state can enforce such an absurd law against a company that likely has no business operations or servers in the state is ridiculous. I don't care if you like the porn site in question or not, or condone or endorse its content. This is a slippery slope towards every regional tinpot dictator legislature attempting to censor the internet by having an entity's domain name rev…
> The idea that a state court in one particular state can enforce such an absurd law against a company that likely has no business operations or servers in the state is ridiculous. I agree. California has been doing this since 2022 [1][2] and it's equally indefensible. States should not be allowed to wield their size and influence as a cudgel against other states and jurisdictions. [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.…
Interestingly if you browse American-hosted online internet firearms accessories websites (and FFLs who will sell you something online to ship to your local FFL), for the most part, it's just a basic HTML popup of "Are you over 18? Click Yes, okay, proceed". I haven't seen a single one that actually attempts to implement age verification. It seems that the Internet-based vendors, the same general cohort of companies that are exhibitors or attendees at the annual SHOT trade show, are not very scared of the Californian AG yet.
I'm unaware of the Californians attempting to seize anyone's domain name over this issue. But indeed this also seems like an overreach, California doesn't get to regulate what an Internet gun accessory store in Idaho advertises or publishes on the Internet. State to state transfers of serialized items go through a well defined federal government regulated process, such as if a person in Nebraska buys a Zastava M70 online from a dealer in Montana.
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#165The idea that a state court in one particular state can enforce such an absurd law against a company that likely has no business operations or servers in the state is ridiculous. I don't care if you like the porn site in question or not, or condone or endorse its content. This is a slippery slope towards every regional tinpot dictator legislature attempting to censor the internet by having an entity's domain name rev…
One of the reasons I keep my .in domain up and running as my backup email (and just for personal use). That .com domain, if taken down/away from other jurisdictions (the ones that can easily do it) for whatever reason (including a “mistake” or slip) would mean it’s gone for good (because I neither have the capacity nor resources to appeal/fight that in foreign lands).
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Today I learned that a foreign government operates in Texas. I didn't know that Texas is supporting and promoting the North Korean government: http://naenara.com.kp/main/index/en/first I wonder why they aren't being called out for anti-American terrorist groups.
Not a .com domain, so out of reach. Anything within US reach, individuals or entities, is fair game from a US judicial system perspective. Everyone learns this the hard way, it seems.
I think he means since IANA/ICANN assings country LTD, so technically it's also under USA jurisdiction.
Waiting for the day when texas court demands deleting .ee LTD (since estonia is currently only country which has fought agaisnt age verification laws)
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The idea that a state court in one particular state can enforce such an absurd law against a company that likely has no business operations or servers in the state is ridiculous. Two things of note regarding this. First, note the office of origin: Texas Attorney General, which is currently occupied by Ken Paxton who is running for a tightly contested seat in the US Senate. Second, a state court does not have jurisd…
And third, there was a default judgement. I wonder what was the value of the domain on the open market, its quite a famous domain and probably had high lead generation.. But I agree with the parent comment. This is so much state overstepping bounds and irony aside, so much for independence and rights by a state that proclaims personal agency comes first.
>> Two things of note regarding this.
> And third, there was a default judgement.
Unenforceable and meant strictly for political theater IMHO.
> This is so much state overstepping bounds and irony aside, so much for independence and rights by a state that proclaims personal agency comes first.
When a political party declares we are in a "post-truth" era and fully embraces nihilistic "the ends justify the means" tactics, the result is inevitable;
Take, hold, and increase power by any means necessary.
And we then find ourselves with elected officials wildly exceeding their mandate, such as here.
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The idea that a state court in one particular state can enforce such an absurd law against a company that likely has no business operations or servers in the state is ridiculous. I agree. California has been doing this since 2022 [1][2] and it's equally indefensible. States should not be allowed to wield their size and influence as a cudgel against other states and jurisdictions. [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.…
Interestingly if you browse American-hosted online internet firearms accessories websites (and FFLs who will sell you something online to ship to your local FFL), for the most part, it's just a basic HTML popup of "Are you over 18? Click Yes, okay, proceed". I haven't seen a single one that actually attempts to implement age verification. It seems that the Internet-based vendors, the same general cohort of companies…
But you see, guns aren't harmful to small children. It's that damn pornography. Seeing a gun doesn't traumatize you for life, but man, seeing a private area? Life ruined.
Of course, once the number of years since you were born reaches exactly 18, your brain automatically shuts off the part of you that is impossibly traumatized by private areas, so it's suddenly completely okay and normal.
Oh, and when you reach exactly 16, somehow you're only impossibly traumatized by private areas on the screen, not in-person. Everyone knows this is true.
(I don't mean to be genuinely insensitive about the real harms that adult content can pose. I just think there's a difference between calling content harmful simply because it's adult and content causing harm because the viewer isn't ready for it)
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're going to have give us To be fair, only some of "us" are unwilling to read a two-page document to be informed about a topic under discussion. The words you're looking for are "Defendant is not a resident of this state and is a foreign corporation."
Nice try, that's not the same as not doing business in the state. Most businesses are incorporated in Delaware, they get sued in every state of the union.
> Nice try, that's not the same as not doing business in the state.
Again, until and unless you can show how the Defendant has an established presence within the State of Texas, such that its jurisdiction is applicable, it is difficult to consider your position considered and/or informed.
Re: Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law
#170The sooner the US loses control over the internet the better.
Maybe another county should have developed, built out, and opened up the Internet themselves then?