“The SCOPE Act takes effect this Sunday, Sept. 1, and will require everyone to verify their age for social media.”

So how does this work with Lemmy? Is anyone in Texas just banned, is there some sort of third party ID service lined up…for every instance, lol.

But seriously, how does Lemmy (or the fediverse as a whole) comply? Is there some way it just doesn’t need to?

  • Richard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    7 months ago

    Why should it affect LW or any other (non-Texan) instance? Any rogue country with populists at the head can implement any arbitrary legislation. That does not affect Lemmy instances hosted in countries with reasonable governments. If Texas wants to enforce their rules (or punish for non-compliance), it is on them to approach instance admins or block the site in their corner of the global internet.

    • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is a fair view. I’m not sure anyone has gotten that far, especially outside the country.

      Heres an article about a similar bill in Utah, that hasn’t gone into effect yet.

      What’s not clear from the Utah bill and others is how the states plan to enforce the new regulations.

      I mean if the general consensus is that it doesn’t apply, then, cool.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Interstate commerce is not under the jurisdiction of any state, it’s under the jurisdiction of the federal government. They’d need a federal bill passed.

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Look where it’s hosted? Sorry, but this approach has been outdated for decades. Laws apply when you address the users inside that legislation. No matter where you are, where your server is, etc.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Is there any Lemmy hosted in the US? Texas can put on a stunt against any US instance, but don’t see them even trying for anything from the rest of the world. Too much work/money with too little chance of success.

  • tyler@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Lemmy isn’t social media. Ignoring that though, the law actually says:

    According to the Texas Office of the Attorney General, this new law will primarily “apply to digital services that provide an online platform for social interaction between users that: (1) allow users to create a public or semi-public profile to use the service, and (2) allow users to create or post content that can be viewed by other users of the service. This includes digital services such as message boards, chat rooms, video channels, or a main feed that presents users content created and posted by other users.”

    Which literally applies to every single site on the entire planet that has a comment section. This law is incredibly unenforceable.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yep. This is another dumbass politicians trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist with a solution that doesn’t work.

  • UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The answer? Block Texas

    Not joking. If suddenly hundreds or thousands of sites would become unavailable. It wouldn’t last a week

  • ulkesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s called the “Fuck Texas” response to such a garbage law. And good luck enforcing it especially with federated sites.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    lol it doesn’t

    Texass is gonna have to play whack-a-mole and do it the hard way. And I’m pretty sure the more technically inclined members of the fediverse are going to have loads of fun fucking with whatever IT measures they try to mitigate this with, because they’re certainly not going to be drawing the best and brightest minds.

    Put another way: weaponized non-neurotypicals are gonna have some fun fucking with a state government that doesnt like them, because the feeling is very much mutual.

  • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    If you don’t operate in Texas, do you have you comply? Is the easy fix is don’t have your servers be in Texas?

    • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Someone can correct me if im wrong, but, pretty sure its any social media. Similar to what happened with pornhub.

      According to the Texas Office of the Attorney General, this new law will primarily “apply to digital services that provide an online platform for social interaction between users that: (1) allow users to create a public or semi-public profile to use the service, and (2) allow users to create or post content that can be viewed by other users of the service. This includes digital services such as message boards, chat rooms, video channels, or a main feed that presents users content created and posted by other users.”

      • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        7 months ago

        I mean my question was addressing the scope of the jurisdiction Texas can have over a server in another state. It feels like the onus is on them (or the ISPs in Texas) to block that server

        • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Maybe someone is better equip to answer this question. As far as I understand, it is up to the social media company, as it is operating in the state. Sort of the way the corporate office of a national grocery store can be sued.

          https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-05-BillAnalysis-HB18-Updated.pdf

          First, it prohibits digital service providers from entering into an agreement with a known minor unless they have verifiable parental consent.

          It seems its up to whomever is registering the account. If the person is under 18 they see a scrubbed version, of the person is over 18 they have full access. I’m not sure an ISP has control like that. I could be wrong.

          I know with pornhub, the ISP didn’t block the site, pornhub itself did.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            “Operating in the state” and “accessible in the state” are different.

            Much like a business doesn’t have to have a specific state’s business license to sell to customers of a different state, a website does not have to comply with all laws everywhere just because the laws exist. If they’re operating in Texas, they will. If they’re accessible from Texas, that’s Texas’ problem.

    • naonintendois@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      If you own an instance it’s better to check with a lawyer. They might give you a warning first or they might go after you immediately. How effective that is depends on what country you live in and which country the server is in.

  • roofuskit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m fine with Texas disappearing from the internet. Literally every site with a comment section now has to comply or just block Texas. One of those seems more feasible.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    Comply?

    “Is there some way it just doesn’t need to” = “Is there some scenario in which Texas laws don’t apply worldwide?”

    Yes. There is.