Texas wins court order to suspend domain name for violating age-verification law

Post by inigyou » Sat, Jul 18, 2026, 12:57 PM UTC

harshreality wrote: post #211

jmclnx wrote: post #68

Well the site does not present Texas in a good light. Their .gov site presents me with this. Looks like they need to worry about their own site instead of worrying about out of state sites. >Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead > Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to www.texasattorneygeneral.gov. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, ema…

It's being served by cloudflare and gets A+ from ssllabs. Maybe there's something going on with your network or your browser's TLS support.

Post by squigz » Sat, Jul 18, 2026, 1:03 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #259

squigz wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate how quickly some people have just accepted age verification is inevitable.

You got an alternative proposal? You could run you and 537 of your best friends for Congress and make it illegal

Post by walrus01 » Sat, Jul 18, 2026, 1:07 PM UTC

15155 wrote: post #236

profmonocle wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It operates in Texas if it is serving Texas users. What do you mean "serves"? Does that just mean not actively blocking users from Texas? Allowing your web site to be accessible regardless of user location is, and always has been, the default way to run a web site. Your assertion would mean that web site operators are beholden to the laws of all jurisdictions on the planet if they don't actively block those users.…

> Think about what a bad precedent that would be. Some countries criminalize promotion of pro-LGBT+ content. What if those countries suddenly demand extradition of people who run pro-LGBT+ blogs because the web sites are available there? Simple: a local court having jurisdiction over those individuals would utilize their own laws and discretion to decide if they are required to extradite these people. If a country ch…

Post by 15155 » Sat, Jul 18, 2026, 1:20 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #257

15155 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> travel to Texas without risk of arrest This isn't some "non-extradition country without a treaty" scenario - "neener neener, if I don't step foot in your area you can't touch me." The United States does still have a functioning Constitution. If Texas wants to arrest an employee of these organizations, they can simply issue a Texan arrest warrant and other States will be compelled to enforce it.

Can Texas compel other states to arrest abortion clinic workers?

Post by BLKNSLVR » Sat, Jul 18, 2026, 1:26 PM UTC

skillina wrote: post #105

15155 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you create the infrastructure, you make the rules. If a party doesn't like those rules, they are free to create their own replacement infrastructure and obtain global buy-in. ccTLDs already exist and their respective countries have sovereignty over those TLDs: the UK can disappear any .uk domain name it wants from the global internet. The .com TLD is American, and is therefore subject to American legal proceedin…

> The .com TLD is American, and is therefore subject too American legal proceedings This is not an "American" proceeding so much as a Texan one, and it's not clear that the State of Texas should have any jurisdiction over the .com TLD.