A trade group for the adult entertainment industry will appear at the Supreme Court on Wednesday in its challenge to a Texas law that requires pornography sites to verify the age of their users before providing access – for example, by requiring a government-issued identification. The law applies to any website whose content is one-third or more “harmful to minors” – a definition that the challengers say would include most sexually suggestive content, from nude modeling to romance novels and R-rated movies.
Can’t they just threaten to release Republican’s porn accounts? We know they got them.
It’s like the pro-democracy version of the Ashley Madison hack.
That would be hugely illegal, so no, they can’t threaten that.
Just create a hackersona by taking a random Joker card from Balatro, and make it look like a hacker attack.
It’s not illegal at all, what are you talking about.
The law applies to any website whose content is one-third or more “harmful to minors”
So … Infowars, Fox News, OAN, Answers in Genesis, JW, Texas.gov … right?
Or, all the porn sites should just put huge amounts of public domain works and open source repositories on their sites, so that less than one-third is “harmful to minors.”
They’re the arbiters of what is “harmful to minors”.
Yeah, they would just say that those public domain works or open source repositories teach minors undesirable knowledge of some sort or compete with commercial software vendors and/or entertainment providers.
Well yeah, they’re experts in hurting children.
4chan
4chan will be okay, it hosts /pol/, a nazi board.
“Flood the zone with bullshit” can work for both sides.
Fascism wants an internet where you have to verify your identity to use it at all. Capitalists want the same, and they’ve already built a turnkey totalitarianism mass surveillance precursor to big brother on behalf of neoliberal “democracies”. They will 100% finish the job for fascism. This was always the endgame of mass surveillance.
I guess we’re about to see how many favors they’re going to give to the fundigelicals. Whee.
My guess is they side with Texas (because they’ve had too much normal adjudication lately), citing some impropriety statute from the Dutch Puritans circa 1683 as their core precedent, followed by pointing out that there’s no federal law that supercedes it, so neener-neener.
I guess all the corruption and moral collapse allows me, who has absolutely no clue about law, to actually have educated guesses how important cases are voted.
I simply ask myself “how would a bad person decide?”
Couldn’t the site just host hundreds of test pattern videos, or something else that compresses super well in order to avoid that “one-third” bar?
why would anyone challenge this law to a hostile court so the texas law becomes landmark and set precident
