“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?

  • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    4 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?

    • My guess is that the law is basically extra-territorial - meaning that in theory it applies no matter where you are based.

      For a for-profit service this is more enforceable - just gotta find a way to seize the stream of money flowing out of Texas for violate of the law.

      For a service based in the US this is more enforceable - just gotta get the federal system and other states to cooperate, and enforce Texas’s court judgement, and then Texas can find a way to seize the stream of money flowing around and out of the US (or perhaps seize the US assets of the company).

      For a non-commercial entity based in the territory of the European Union that has no funds flowing at all from the US (think lemmy.world or feddit.de here) then it’s probably quite a bit harder to do anything at all in terms of effective enforcement.

      • RedSeries@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m gonna petition my state to make a law that if someone is from Texas and tries to enforce Texan laws on my state, they’re executed on the spot.

        Should be about as enforceable as this joke of a law.

    • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 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.”

      • Lost_My_Mind@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Fuck 'em. They want to do this, let Facebook, and Reddit, and Instagram, and TikTok and the fediverse, and any others that I’m forgetting refuse to serve connections to Texas.

        Make Texas the ONE PLACE where the internet is just yahoo and thehampsterdance.com

        And then when Texans go elsewhere, they realize all they did was punish themselves. The rest of the world moves on without them.

      • (1) allow users to create a public or semi-public profile to use the service

        So it seems like I’m safe. I run my own single-user instance to federate and post - but I don’t allow others to sign up at all, so they can’t create a public or “semi-public” profile here (and what does semi-public mean?)

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I was going to argue that your account is publicly viewable, but I realized that you may still be right. This depends on their definition of what is a user.

          Same with semi-public. May even be used for anything that is not public but they don’t like it.

          • tyler@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            The law literally is so broad it applies to every website on the planet with a comment section. This will be struck down immediately.

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

          I find this interesting. Does one just install software and buy a domain? I would assume theres somewhere you have to register with in order to federate. I mean, if theres no one to go after, this would be a nice work around. At least, until theres a site for every Texan that figures it out.

          I think semi public would be like setting your facebook profile to private. It shows your name, and basic details, but doesn’t show all your posts or interactions.

          Edit: haha, you kinda answered this somewhere else as I was typing.

          • I think semi public would be like setting your facebook profile to private. It shows your name, and basic details, but doesn’t show all your posts or interactions.

            Seems reasonable. It’s good to figure these things out now btw, as courts will adopt the “common definition” if the law doesn’t explicitly define things (including referencing dictionaries for the meanings of words).

            I find this interesting. Does one just install software and buy a domain?

            You don’t even need to buy a domain necessarily, just have a place to install the software and use one of the free services.

            I run my own self-hosted single-user pyfedi instance, and I more-or-less do so for free (I mean I pay for internet and I bought the old laptop that I’m running pyfedi on ages ago, but that’s it).

            After looking at a lot of different options, I decided to go with srv dot us since srv dot us guarantees you a permanent domain name without having to pay (albeit you can’t pick the name). srv dot us actually doesn’t require any signup either - you just follow the instructions, connect, and go - and they only keep records like your ip address for one day, so if you stop using it for longer then poof you’re suddenly that much harder to trace.

            ngrok dot com also offers a free domain name (but you can’t pick - if you want to choose your own then you have to pay). You sign up with your email and all that though (you can also sign up using your github account). I almost went with this (the author of pyfedi, [email protected] , mentions (recommends?) using ngrok for this purpose) but at the time I had some other issues and misdiagnosed it as ngrok blocking federation with their silly popup (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/73017353/how-to-bypass-ngrok-browser-warning for more details)

            You can learn more about pyfedi by visiting the flagship instance at piefed.social

            I would assume theres somewhere you have to register with in order to federate.

            Nope, nothing like that. Verification is done mostly just by making sure you own or otherwise legitimately have access to the domain that you are using (specifically that you have SSL certs that are certified for the given domain for use in HTTPS if you wanna get a little bit technical).

            I mean, if theres no one to go after, this would be a nice work around. At least, until theres a site for every Texan that figures it out.

            So fly-by-night instances it is! It wouldn’t necessarily work for large instances with many users though - pretty much all of these do buy their own domain, for which you have to provide your legal name and address and such (even if it’s not public thanks to domain privacy, it would be available to law enforcement)

            And federation does not play nice with someone’s domain name changing. Meanwhile if one is caught registering for a domain with a fake name etc then the domain registrar is entitled to cancel the ownership of that domain and take it back.

            That said, one might luck out and find a good domain with a registrar that’s in a jurisdiction that is particularly unfriendly to Texas’s ability to enforce SCOPE.

            Edit: haha, you kinda answered this somewhere else as I was typing

            Thought I could enhance my previous answers by adding a little more detail here.

            • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Wow! Thank you for such a detailed answer. Even without some weird law, it’s good information to have, and with a little elbow grease, it sounds completely doable. And if it keeps people from getting in trouble / protects privacy, I’m all for it!

      • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        4 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

        • Aha,

          Exemptions Small businesses as defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA);

          Not sure how’d this work overseas, but basically lemmy.world and friends just needs to apply to SBA to get recognized as a small business, and they’re all good. (Or perhaps they could try to apply thru a US Embassy; or apply at a local authority and argue for legal equivalence between the SBA’s recognition and their own country’s).

          As for enforcement, well,

          If someone were to violate the act, the AG’s office may seek … civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation, and attorneys’ fees

          So yeah basically it comes down to trying to grab money. So as they say about sucking blood from a turnip…

        • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 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.

          • the ISP didn’t block the site,

            And from the article you posted at the beginning, perhaps the ISP can’t be required to do that. At least it’s not list as an explicit remedy. Others are suggesting that Texas might block the site from being accessible from within Texas, but there’s nothing in the law itself that suggests Texas would legally do this.

            Basically it reads like that they’re restricted to whatever the existing office of the AG of Texas could have already done in terms of enforcement powers, which is largely fines.

            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.

            Or, like, not allow registration for under 18s at all, I suppose.

            I’m not sure an ISP has control like that. I could be wrong.

            No, you are right. The site itself must comply.

            • FarFarAway@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Or, like, not allow registration for under 18s at all, I suppose.

              Problem is, one would still have to find a way to verify the registrant is over 18.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            In the case of a grocery store, they’d have an actual physical presence in the state along with revenue and employees, so I (a total laymen) don’t see how that’s comparable to a website like Lemmy. Even PornHub would be different IMO since they have paid content and the transaction would be happening in Texas. A site like Lemmy earns nothing from its users and doesn’t sell anything so it seems like it’d be quite the stretch to hold them accountable for the actions of some kid on the other side of the country (or planet) since Texas jurisdiction ends at the border of Texas.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            4 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.

            • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Pretty sure it doesn’t work that way. Look at what happened to Binance; not a US website, not technically allowing US customers, still successfully prosecuted by the US government for not doing enough to prevent people in the US from using it.

              • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                That’s because they were facilitating actual, across-the-board federal crimes.

                Not looking at titties.

                I could see states that have such draconian laws working together to attempt to do anything about flagrant violators, but otherwise Texas has yet another pointless, toothless virtue signaling “law” on their hands.

                • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  The difference between what the laws are trying to enforce is a different issue though. The point is a website can be prosecuted just for being accessible when what it offers is against local laws.

                  • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    No, it cannot. Not a state-based law that the feds don’t care about and other states will tell them to fuck off over.

                    Not unless they are operating in Texas, accessible to Texas cops, with property seizeable by Texas authorities.

    • naonintendois@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 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.