Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

texasattorneygeneral.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 323 posts

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

#221

Post by 15155 »

wizcaps wrote: post #62
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…

I think you know how absurd it sounds to say in response “well you can go and create your own internet”

Welcome to the world: people own things, have power, and use violence to protect their interests.

Stomping your feet on the ground because something's not perceived as fair doesn't really change things.

China has its own internet with limited access to the global "internet," other countries are free to do the same.

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

#222

Post by 15155 »

walrus01 wrote: post #133
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 to American legal proceedings. Ample precedent and prior case law exists that the US Federal government can obtain court orders to seize .COM domains. Going back 15 years now. State government that's another question entirely. When people say "American legal proceedings", the distinction between state courts and federal courts have two very different regions of res…

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/full_faith_and_credit

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

#223

Post by 15155 »

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.

See Article IV, Section I of the Constitution of the United States of America. What a pesky document!

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

#224

Post by 15155 »

markdown wrote: post #61
15155 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do other countries do who don't have Verisign to lean on? They lean on their ISPs, see Spain and the La Liga controversy.

That's the correct way, because it applies only to residents of that jurisdiction. Texas should be able to prevent their local ISP's from showing illegal content, but not control what people see in other parts of the country/state.

> Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

Pretty clear to me.

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

#225

Post by Scaled »

inigyou wrote: post #88
nadermx wrote: post #53

I guess by default all .com's have US jurisdiction? Because even if it's a default judgment, and the registrar is based out of the US, which seems to the case here, any court order from the US is able to take a domain down. Found the case, https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/07... The Ninth Circuit held that the U.S. court had jurisdiction to proceed because VeriSign—the registry for all .com do…

Every TLD that is not a ccTLD is effectively a US ccTLD. This has always been the case, and perhaps the US has tricked us into becoming complacent. If the world was fair they would all be underneath .us. I want to see other countries start rejecting the ICANN root and forcing all the US domains under .us, but it will never happen. It would break their vhosts for one thing. Doing it at the browser level could avoid th…

I vaguely recall some crypto project that was 'blockchain for domain names'. I scoffed at it at the time, but maybe there is a real need for something like that after all. (Or some other system for domain names you truly own and can't be rugpulled.)

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

#226

Post by walrus01 »

inigyou wrote: post #216
walrus01 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARIN is also a US non-profit corporation, located in Virginia, but the people who run RIPE and APNIC and AFRINIC might disagree that the Internet is entirely "controlled" by Americans.

RIPE, APNIC and AfriNIC (you forgot LACNIC or deliberately excluded it because South America is technically America) don't control the DNS.

Yes, my point was the dns isn't the "whole" internet. I know network engineers at some major ISPs that would still find a way to communicate with each other if a genie waved a magic wand and all dns infrastructure worldwide went "poof".

But also my point was that ARIN specifically is vulnerable to USA originated malicious court actions the same as verisign is.

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

#227

Post by 15155 »

comrade1234 wrote: post #31
BobbyTables2 wrote: post #2

I don’t understand - was this site or company based in Texas? Otherwise the general idea seems absurd that an individual state could freeze a domain impacting for the whole Internet… (EDIT: I won’t lose any sleep at the loss of such scum but the general principle seems a bit strange.)

It's not confusing and you should understand what's happening for your own safety. This has been happening for a couple of decades internationally and now with USA states. This result means that Texas can take various means to block motherless. But more importantly no motherless employees should travel to Texas without risk of arrest. Same for abc/youtube/facebook employess traveling to India. You should be aware of…

> 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.

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

#228

Post by 15155 »

antonvs wrote: post #194
gnabgib wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even people with mothers shouldn't travel to Texas. You know real, friendly, generous humans live in Texas, right?

Until those people control the Texas government, I don’t see the relevance. I grew up in South Africa during the apartheid era, when black people weren’t allowed to vote or even participate in the economy at much beyond the level of slaves. I didn’t get upset when people criticized South Africa, or boycotted it, because the country’s actions certainly justified that. The entire US is in much the same situation now: i…

How is South Africa doing today by comparison, in your opinion?

Would you rather live in Johannesburg or Dallas?

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

#229

Post by 15155 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #160
toomuchtodo wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My other comment in this thread has citations demonstrating SCOTUS support and approval for Texas to enforce these laws, as well as links to statue trackers showing where states and countries have implemented these age validation requirements for social media and adult content sites. It was a choice by Motherless and their holding company, Kick Online, to egregiously ignore Texas law; the law has been found sound by…

Importantly "egregious" is also opinion. The other point of view is that they "very reasonably" ignored Texas law because they're not in Texas. The Supreme Court found that the law was valid, but that ruling doesn't mean it necessarily applies in a situation like this.

Article IV, Section I

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

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

#230

Post by inigyou »

walrus01 wrote: post #226
inigyou wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RIPE, APNIC and AfriNIC (you forgot LACNIC or deliberately excluded it because South America is technically America) don't control the DNS.

Yes, my point was the dns isn't the "whole" internet. I know network engineers at some major ISPs that would still find a way to communicate with each other if a genie waved a magic wand and all dns infrastructure worldwide went "poof". But also my point was that ARIN specifically is vulnerable to USA originated malicious court actions the same as verisign is.

Verisign continually responds to requests. ARIN traditionally doesn't - it just hands out numbers. But we'll see how RPKI makes ARIN more similar to Verisign. ARIN could be ordered to delete RPKI records for an AS, kicking it out of the portion of the internet that checks RPKI records - which also happens to be mandated by the US government.
Post reply on HN