> What do other countries do who don't have Verisign to lean on?

They lean on their ISPs, see Spain and the La Liga controversy.

But that, more appropriately, only affects internet users in that country (ignoring the cloudflare network blocking that causes various other sites to also be blocked).

This appears to basically wipe the site from the entire internet, for all countries.

▲

15155 a day ago | parent [-]

When you create the infrastructure, you make the rules. If a party doesn't like those rules, they are free to create their own replacement infrastructure and obtain global buy-in.

ccTLDs already exist and their respective countries have sovereignty over those TLDs: the UK can disappear any .uk domain name it wants from the global internet.

The .com TLD is American, and is therefore subject to American legal proceedings.

▲

a day ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

walrus01 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The .com TLD is American, and is therefore subject to American legal proceedings.

Ample precedent and prior case law exists that the US Federal government can obtain court orders to seize .COM domains. Going back 15 years now.

State government that's another question entirely. When people say "American legal proceedings", the distinction between state courts and federal courts have two very different regions of responsibility and authority.

	▲	15155 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/full_faith_and_credit

▲

BLKNSLVR 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah, that whole setup stinks. It actually gives a great use case to alternative DNS and decentralized infrastructure.

Multiple Internets over Internet time. Sadly. Some damage can't be routed around.

▲

15155 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Do people care this much about this specific porn site that they are willing to upend global infrastructure? Principles don't make precedent, it takes money and actual interest to do that.

The latent ability of the United States to shut off some specific domain within a TLD is never going to cause people at large to say "We'll make our own .com with blackjack and hookers!"

In this hypothetical new system, other DNS roots would exist - and for practicality's sake, wouldn't collide with the "old Internet." Nobody is reissuing .coms, they will pick some new TLD or system entirely.. this today is known as a "ccTLD." Are people interested enough in true sovereignty beyond what ccTLDs offer? What does that even look like?

Why do most businesses enjoying .com domains today want to move to your system of control? Nothing can be truly "decentralized" any more than the DNS of today is: countries effectively opt in one way or another - the internet is a cooperative system, much like international diplomacy.

	▲	BLKNSLVR 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"They came for the X and I said nothing" (XXX in this case) It's the precedent it sets, and especially with the ... sensitivity ... in the US at the moment around 'opinions on things', this feels like it could be the first pebble of an avalanche.

▲

skillina a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The .com TLD is American, and is therefore subject too American legal proceedings

This is not an "American" proceeding so much as a Texan one, and it's not clear that the State of Texas should have any jurisdiction over the .com TLD.

	▲	BLKNSLVR 18 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		As much as I agree, I think Texas is within their rights to ask Verisign to perform a massively overbroad action. Verisign is likely to respond depending on how good they think the relationship is between Texan lawmakers and the current Whitehouse administration.
	▲	15155 21 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		See Article IV, Section I of the Constitution of the United States of America. What a pesky document!

▲

wizcaps a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you know how absurd it sounds to say in response “well you can go and create your own internet”

▲

15155 21 hours ago | parent [-]

Welcome to the world: people own things, have power, and use violence to protect their interests.

Stomping your feet on the ground because something's not perceived as fair doesn't really change things.

China has its own internet with limited access to the global "internet," other countries are free to do the same.

	▲	inigyou 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Your comment is no more constructive than the one you're replying to. Comments should get more thoughtful, not less, as the conversation goes on. For instance, how might we realistically replace the internet with a more neutral one?

▲

markdown a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That's the correct way, because it applies only to residents of that jurisdiction. Texas should be able to prevent their local ISP's from showing illegal content, but not control what people see in other parts of the country/state.

	▲	15155 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. Pretty clear to me.