5 ms·
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
by BobbyTables2 3mo ago
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.)
- jagged-chisel 3mo agoI think it remains to be seen whether Verisign follows through.
- jerrythegerbil 3mo agohttps://dnschecker.org/#A/motherless.com https://dnschecker.org/#A/motherless.com
- EmbarrassedHelp 3mo agoSo he managed to block the site globally for not forcibly violating the privacy of its users with mandatory age verification. The US court system really needs to do something about this, and overturn Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton in favour of Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union.
- reactordev 3mo agoThe US court system is completely hamstrung by the current administration.
- applfanboysbgon 3mo agoFWIW, the site isn't blocked globally. They just moved to a new domain. I do generally agree that local governments trying to forcefully exert their influence beyond their jurisdiction is deeply problematic. It wouldn't even be possible to host a website on the internet if this becomes normalized, due to being held to thousands of contradicting standards. At most Texas should have the authority to tell Texas ISPs to block traffic.
- WillPostForFood 3mo agoAllowing states to force ISPs to block websites might be an even bigger can of worms.
- inigyou 3mo agoMotherless shouldn't have used a domain under Texan jurisdiction if they didn't want this to happen.
- toomuchtodo 3mo agoIt operates in Texas if it is serving Texas users. > Kick Online, which openly describes itself as a “moral free” company, ignored the lawsuit and refused to comply with the court’s order. It continued publishing and distributing harmful sexual material that was accessible to minors in Texas. This is the same website with a forum with millions of users trading information on how to assault their partner. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2026/03/world/expose-rape-assault-online-vis-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2026/03/world/expose-rape-as... FAFO.
- pixl97 3mo agoAll fun and games till religions get in battles and shut down websites talking about gods and beliefs they don't like.
- BobbyTables2 3mo agoIndeed. Does this mean Texas can shutdown other websites in other states that provide abortion support? I’m sure there are those who would argue such to be harmful to children…(not to mention the fetus)
- toomuchtodo 3mo agoAll speech does not deserve the same protection, certainly not unlimited protection, says SCOTUS. Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce law requiring age verification and parental consent on apps - https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/07/supreme-court-allows-texas-to-enforce-law-requiring-age-verification-and-parental-consent-on-app/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/07/supreme-court-allows-texa... - July 6th, 2026 Supreme Court allows Texas’ law on age-verification for pornography sites - https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/court-allows-texas-law-on-age-verification-for-pornography-sites/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/court-allows-texas-law-on... - June 27th, 2025 https://mashable.com/article/all-the-states-and-countries-with-age-verification-laws https://mashable.com/article/all-the-states-and-countries-wi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_laws_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_age_verification_...
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verisign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verisign (Under "Controversies".) > In March 2012, the U.S. government declared that it has the right to seize domains ending in .com, .net, .cc, .tv, .name, and .org if the companies administering the domains are based in the U.S. The U.S. government can seize the domains ending in .com, .net, .cc, .tv, and .name by serving a court-order on Verisign, which manages those domains.
- what 3mo agoTexas isn’t the US government?
- 8note 3mo agois verisign a texas company? id assume delaware, and so delaware, and the federal government have jurisdiction, not texas
- randbyte 3mo agoWhen people say “US government” they usually mean the federal government…
- what 3mo agoThat was my point?
- TylerE 3mo agoNo more than the government of France is the EU government.
- Cpoll 3mo ago> The Office of the Attorney General will continue to use every available legal mechanism, including writs of attachment against domain names, to enforce Texas law and ensure that no company, regardless of where it is incorporated, can profit from exposing Texas children to harmful content. And Kick Online Entertainment S.A. appears to be incorporated in Luxembourg. The "S.A." is a mostly European thing, kind of like a "limited" company.
- BLKNSLVR 3mo ago> obtained a court-ordered writ directing Verisign, the company that maintains the “.com” domain registry, to place the domain “motherless.com” on a registry lock, hold, or similar status. So they're using the fact that Verisign is a US company and can therefore be leaned on. I'm not sure how I feel about this. What do other countries do who don't have Verisign to lean on? US companies really don't like being told what to do by governments of other countries, but when the shoe is on the other foot...
- 15155 3mo ago> 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.
- BLKNSLVR 3mo agoBut that, more appropriately, only affects internet users in that country (ignoring the cloudflare network blocking that causes various other sites to also be blocked). This appears to basically wipe the site from the entire internet, for all countries.
- 15155 3mo agoWhen 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 proceedings.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- wizcaps 3mo agoI think you know how absurd it sounds to say in response “well you can go and create your own internet”
- comrade1234 3mo agoIt'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 this and monitor it in your industry.
- TurdF3rguson 3mo agoI would think it only applies to named employees, right?
- antonvs 3mo agoEven people with mothers shouldn't travel to Texas.
- gnabgib 3mo ago> Even people with mothers shouldn't travel to Texas. You know real, friendly, generous humans live in Texas, right?
- kibwen 3mo agoThe friendly, generous humans who resoundingly endorse the corrupt Ken Paxton's actions and will overwhelmingly vote for him to serve them in the senate this year? Actions speak louder than words. With friends like Texans, who needs enemies?
- clipsy 3mo agoReal, friendly, generous humans live in Haiti, too. That doesn't make it a good travel destination.
- cindyllm 3mo ago[dead]
- tailscaler2026 3mo ago[flagged]
- WhyNotHugo 3mo ago> I won’t lose any sleep at the loss of such scum but the general principle seems a bit strange. That's generally key in making a precedent. The first case is someone nobody really cares for, but it's built a precedent where the next case must follow suit.