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

311–320 of 323 posts

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

#311

Post by inigyou »

card_zero wrote: post #299
walrus01 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look at the list of new generic TLDs that are run by Donuts LLC now Identity Digital, a US based company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_Digital

But that list does not include .horse, which is on another list as operated by Minds + Machines, "a British Virgin Islands-based company". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English-language_gener... I suppose they're in California really, but perhaps not for legal purposes. Likewise Uniregistry (.lol) "was registered in the Cayman Islands", for what good that does.

All gTLDs are required by ICANN to follow US law, regardless of the registry's actual or legal location. This is because ICANN is US-based.

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

#312

Post by graemep »

walrus01 wrote: post #260
inigyou wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe crossroadsguy lives in India. By using your home country's ccTLD, you have only one source of censorship instead of two.

I mean he's probably fine as long as he does absolutely nothing to challenge the status quo or anyone powerful in India. Which doesn't really seem like an optimal situation for a censorship resistant domain. There's a vast quantity of examples of Indian state and federal government authorities issuing court orders to "remove" content from the internet over the past 25+ years. Take a look at some of the citations in t…

Someone living in India would have to follow Indian court orders regardless of where their domain was registered.

Another TLD would mean obeying laws and court orders in another country as well

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

#313

Post by fragmede »

inigyou wrote: post #311
card_zero wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that list does not include .horse, which is on another list as operated by Minds + Machines, "a British Virgin Islands-based company". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English-language_gener... I suppose they're in California really, but perhaps not for legal purposes. Likewise Uniregistry (.lol) "was registered in the Cayman Islands", for what good that does.

All gTLDs are required by ICANN to follow US law, regardless of the registry's actual or legal location. This is because ICANN is US-based.

US copyright holders would very much like thepiratebay.org to go away, yet it persists. It's not even technically true, ICANN is a California non-profit, which does not automatically make all aspects of running a registrar subject to all US law. The registry's location is legally relevant. A German registry has to obey German and EU law. Maybe this time will be different, but the pirate bay has been around since 2003.

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

#314

Post by inigyou »

fragmede wrote: post #313
inigyou wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All gTLDs are required by ICANN to follow US law, regardless of the registry's actual or legal location. This is because ICANN is US-based.

US copyright holders would very much like thepiratebay.org to go away, yet it persists. It's not even technically true, ICANN is a California non-profit, which does not automatically make all aspects of running a registrar subject to all US law. The registry's location is legally relevant. A German registry has to obey German and EU law. Maybe this time will be different, but the pirate bay has been around since 2003…

The US government would have no issue shutting down the domain thepiratebay.org. it could simply ask the registry to do so or ask a court to order it to do so. For some reason, it has not.

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

#315

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

inigyou wrote: post #308
MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been curious what means and criteria one can use to vet a synthetic drug.

Do you mean well-known drugs or new drugs? Tests have been developed for well-known drugs, and at big parties there are often harm-reduction charities offering free or cheap drug testing.

I mean established ones. I'm aware of the narcotic safety tests, but have no idea how one might check the quality of a psychedelic like LSD before taking it.

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

#316

Post by otterley »

inigyou wrote: post #310
otterley wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Porn is protected speech, with the exception of CSAM and "obscene" materials. You do understand how exceptions work, don't you? If you have further questions, ask an attorney who specializes in First Amendment law. I also recommend law school.

In Texas, all porn is obscene.

Says who? Please provide a legal citation or at least an allegation.

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

#317

Post by antonvs »

15155 wrote: post #228
antonvs wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

What's your point? That the US hasn't completed its plunge into decline yet?

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

#318

Post by LoganDark »

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #315
inigyou wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean well-known drugs or new drugs? Tests have been developed for well-known drugs, and at big parties there are often harm-reduction charities offering free or cheap drug testing.

I mean established ones. I'm aware of the narcotic safety tests, but have no idea how one might check the quality of a psychedelic like LSD before taking it.

Reagent tests are the standard for that. They're basically a bunch of acids that change colors depending on what they're mixed with. You test some samples with a bunch of them, and the way each one changes colors tells you what is or isn't in the samples. Ehrlich reagent is good for checking for the presence of LSD, others are good for ruling out adulterants. Fent strips for example are used to check for presence of fentanyl. You can get all of the above from places like DanceSafe.

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

#319

Post by ImJamal »

arvid-lind wrote: post #207
ImJamal wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Items require payments which usually would be a credit card. Kids cannot get a credit card on their own as far as I know so the parents have to be involved in some way. (Obviously there are alternatives like paypal, prepaid debit cards, etc but it is quite a bit harder to actual get the item).

Hard to get prepaid debit cards? They sell them anywhere with a cash register these days. Are you suggesting this is fine for sites outside the scope of Texas's specific ire?

I am not saying it is hard to get a prepaid debit card. I explicitly mentioned it as a workaround. I am saying that it is harder to get buy a physical item over the internet then to just visit a site.

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

#320

Post by yeetawayhn »

LoganDark wrote: post #168
walrus01 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 exact…

> Seeing a gun doesn't traumatize you for life

It's even worse, the children might see a gun and want one! California can't have that.

Post reply on HN