“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?

  • UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The answer? Block Texas

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

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 months ago

    This has “DMCA notice to a Russian music site” vibes. Basically, we do nothing. They have absolutely zero authority outside of Texas. If the instance is inside Texas’s borders, that’s a different story, but if the instance is located outside, it has no obligation to follow Texas’s law. They can’t do anything. They can’t block Lemmy, because it’s federated. They can’t sue Lemmy, because it’s federated. They have zero recourse, except for slam their feet on the ground and cry like a petulant child.

    • cordlesslamp@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m curious to why can’t they do anything to Lemmy because it’s federated.

      Can they just block all the domain names of lemmy through ISP?

      As for suing, can they just go after the server owners or the hosting service?

      • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Good luck finding “all the domain names”. IDK about suing, but unlike centralised monoliths like Facebook, you’d have to sue every instance violating your rules separately, and that’s assuming you can pin down who and where to sue for each of them.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        They can’t sue, but they could legislate that ISPs have to block lemmy instance domains. That would require Texas legislators to understand Lemmy though, which will never happen.

  • Richard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 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
      14
      ·
      2 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.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I live in Texas, and can confidently tell you the people writing these laws have no fundamental concept of what the internet is or how to implement or enforce such a law for consistent adherence.

        I can also tell you with confidence this law will be wielded with impunity against specific companies/sites our corrupt, petulant AG decides to go after. Fuck Ken Paxton.

        As far as users in Texas, this is nothing a VPN can’t fix.

          • Zedd @lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            Absolutely. Most “travel routers” have openvpn installed on them. I have one router set up with my normal internet, and another with a full time vpn’d connection. The VPN router was like $60.

            They’re also great to have when traveling. It connects to whatever random wifi, and all of your devices show up as a single device. You turn off the VPN to connect to your hotel’s capture portal, then turn it back on and all of your devices have secure internet.

            • GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Is there a particular VPN router that you suggest?

              Also, is there a subscription fee or something for the VPN usage?

              Thank you so much for the info!

              • Zedd @lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                I’m using the gl.Inet 1200 off Amazon.

                There is a monthly fee for your VPN account. I use nordvpn, but there are a ton of options depending on how much you want to pay and what you need.

    • ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can absolutely see Texas looking at it the other way. “Your website can be accessed by our citizens? On you to comply with our laws.” They then spit out a bunch of criminal charges that make things rather inconvenient for some instance hosts. The US reach into international banking systems is uncomfortably long.

      The real problem question is about federation. You can post to an instance from any federated instance. If an account is created in one instance and the user posts to a federated instance are both liable? You have to be able to create accounts AND post to be subject to the law. Can one instance not allow posts but host accounts for participation in other instances to skirt around the law?

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 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
      5
      ·
      2 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.

      • dan1101@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Do you have examples of that? From what I’ve seen the laws only apply if a business has a physical presence in that state or country.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 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.

      • spacecadet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        And the state I’m in would tell them to fuck right off and would probably allow me to counter sue Texas into the ground for harassment. I don’t think Texas wants to mess with states that have massive GDPs and contribute lots of money to the federal government.

  • tyler@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 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.

      • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Nuh uh! I’m a Sovereign Netizen and I’m not driving social engagement, I’m just a traveler on the information superhighway!

        • tyler@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Social engagement has nothing to do with social media. If you define anything with social engagement as social media then you literally are calling the entire internet social media.

      • tyler@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s absolutely not. It has none of the hallmarks of social media (personal relationship, feed of user activity, likes and shares). It’s a forum. Forums existed for decades before social media. If you define forums as social media then you are defining every comment section on every site, including news sites, help sites, things like stack overflow even, as social media which is clearly ridiculous and so broad as to be a useless definition.

      • SyntaxTerror@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s a social news aggregator. I assume the difference is, that this is to follow mainly news, whereas social media is to mainly follow people. In my 10 years of reddit and now Lemmy I never followed any account, I was just there for the niche topics and news aggregation.

        • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          I guess I disagree with “social media is to mainly follow people”. I think social media is for socializing, regardless of who it’s with. Sorry for the double reply.

        • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t know about you but I’m here for the comments sections, i.e. to socialize. That counts as social media IMO. Socializing with random users and not followed accounts, is still socializing.

        • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I totally disagree on both counts: forums are social media, and Lemmy is not a mere forum. Lemmy is a platform where people can create forums, and many of those forums (communities) exist mainly to socialize.

          I’ll give you that some forums (both on Lemmy and otherwise) that have a clear defined topic - such as tech support for a particular thing - are somewhat different from “social media”, but even in those three are often regulars who use the forum to socialize with each other. Any forum with an “off-topic” subforum is social media in my book, in a very real sense (not just technically).

          But hey, we can disagree on this and it’s fine.

          • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            To clarify why I think Lemmy is not a forum: in my eyes, forums are set up by the admins, only the admins can decide which subforums exist and what’s allowed in them. Lemmy and reddit are not simple forums because they allow any user to create a subforum and make those choices and decisions, that traditionally are reserved for admins. It’s an extremely important difference and makes Lemmy much more of a general social platform and not a focused forum.

            • tyler@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Lemmy has the ability to lock down forum creation, like on programming.dev which is the 8th largest lemmy site.

              Social media has always been defined as being about people, not topics. People just don’t even try to use the right words though so you get ridiculous things like people calling something coincidental or unfortunate “ironic”.

          • tyler@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            By your definition every single news comment section is social media, which is clearly a ridiculous suggestion. Webchat, irc, literally anywhere there’s a comment section. That’s just clearly incorrect and so broad as to be a completely useless definition.

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Engaging with people does not make it a social media platform.

            A bathroom wall covered in graffiti messages is not social media.

            an email is not social media.

            text messages are not social media.

            a brick with “Fuck You” written on it, thrown through a window, is not social media.

            A restaurant you go to with friends is not social media.

            A webforum is not social media.

            IMs are not social media.

            Just because you socialize on/in/at something, does not magically make it social media… Because Social Media is a very specific type of thing.

            Stop trying to make everything into freaking facebook.

            • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              facebook is social media, therefor friendica is social media

              instagram is social media, therefor pixelfed is social media

              twitter is social media, therefor mastodon is social media

              at the VERY least, all the latter platforms can interact with each other via activity pub, as can lemmy. by interacting with lemmy, you’re making interactions with social media

              social media isn’t just big tech - social media is a way of interacting with a system

              is reddit social media? most people would say yes it definitely is… and this makes lemmy firmly social media

              • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Getting people to agree to a mistaken, misinformed premise does not mean you are right.

                Lest you also believe the world is a flat pancake and other various nuttery.

                Also, you clearly know what the difference is, since your list of examples is nothing but social media.

                Again. Stop trying to make everything social media. You have all the social media you need to fuel your need for attention, as is. You don’t need to make non-social media into more of it.

                • tromars@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Wikipedia: „Lemmy (social network) - Open source social media software“

                  Also: „Social media are interactive technologies that facilitate the creation, sharing and aggregation of content (such as ideas, interests, and other forms of expression) amongst virtual communities and networks.“ How does Lemmy not fit that description?

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • ExFed@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It probably boils down to the definition of “user” vs. owner/admin/host … But I wouldn’t be surprised if those definitions were unclear or missing entirely.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m tired of Texas trying to expand their sphere of influence beyond their borders with shitty laws and shitty judges.

  • ulkesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

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

  • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    As someone neither living nor hosting my instance in Texas I’ll basically ignore it, and if it came to it I’d block the entirety of Texas if they somehow convince courts to enforce this outside of Texas.

  • roofuskit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 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
    7
    ·
    2 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.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      To expand on this- In general you must comply with the laws of any jurisdiction where you have a business presence. This for example Meta is a USA company, but they have offices in the EU and they sell advertising in the EU from EU offices so they have to comply with EU laws for EU users. They can’t just wave off and say ‘we are a USA company, EU regs don’t apply to us’.

      Lemmy is not a corporation. There is no business presence in Texas, unless an instance admin lives there or hosts the server there. So Lemmy, both as a whole and as individual instances, can simply give Texas the middle finger and say ‘we aren’t subject to your laws as we have no presence or business in your state. We are in the state of California (or whatever) and are subject to the laws of our home state. It is not our job to enforce Texas laws in California on servers hosted in Virginia.’

      Thus Texas trying to enforce their laws on a Cali company is like Hollywood studios sending DMCA notices to Finland.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Thus Texas trying to enforce their laws on a Cali company is like Hollywood studios sending DMCA notices to Finland.

        My point exactly.