Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by profmonocle 15 days ago
A federal court, sure. But this was a state court ruling on a state law.
1 comments

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 the US Supreme Court, and enforceable by Texas. These are the facts of the situation. Everything else to discuss on this is feelings and opinion, unless there are relevant facts not yet shared or discovered.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48953591

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.

That doesn't give them nexus.
Verisign does business in Texas, right? Are they just allowed to do that with no restrictions? Texas can't say "no, you may not sell services to Texans?"
I'm talking about nexus over Kick.

Verisign might be bound by Texas law, but they're not the one accused of breaking any laws here. This isn't a law for registrars, it's a law for websites.