Technology

60520 readers

3968 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

287

Challenge to Texas age-verification on porn sites comes to Supreme Court. (www.scotusblog.com)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Hahaha there's a big difference between a court ruling that you have to provide member lists to the courts if they request it, and "companies are allowed to freely publish personally-identifiable information about their users"

Jesus. That's the best you can do?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

There's not it establishes they are not protected and are in fact releasable.

Laws don't tell you what you can do they tell you what you can't do. Point to a law that says you cannot release membership rolls, you won't find one and the fact you still haven't says oh so much.

Citing a source? No, that's one more step then you've done huh? Let's see your citation perry Mason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

No it doesn't. It states they have to give it to the courts.

Courts wanting access to information to do their job != "Sure, go and publish personally-identifiable information about your customers"

You've still been unable to show that companies can go around publishing information about specific users without their consent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

It started they aren't private.

It's not illegal guy.

I have. You want me to have you a law that tells you what you can do, those don't exist at all. No law says what you can do. The fact you can't find a single law that states it is illegal is the best evidence that it is not in fact illegal. Surely if it's so correct you are beyond reproach that we must simply take it on your word you could easily provide evidence to back your position.. You haven't because you can't.

Grow up.