‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Court agrees with EFF: Utah's VPN law demands a technical impossibility

802 points · 405 comments · hn_acker

  1. SoftTalker · · focus · HN ↗
    > platforms are left with an impossible choice: completely block all VPN traffic nationwide or withdraw access from Utah entirely

    Is it even possible to reliably know that a connection is from a VPN? Anyone can proxy through a random hosting provider.

    1. happyPersonR · · focus · HN ↗
      Requires the vpn provider to snitch and possible tag the ip frames or http frames lol

      Folks would just host their own vpns various places and this would be pointless ….

      1. unglaublich · · focus · HN ↗
        It's all just an effort to control the 90%.
        1. pkilgore · · focus · HN ↗
          It lawfare against porn. They don't want these companies to exist. They want it to be impossible to comply with the law to shut them down.
          1. bigbuppo · · focus · HN ↗
            It's lawfare against Constitutionally-protected speech. The "for the children" bit is just an appeal to emotion.

            /Same as it ever was

            1. HiPhish · · focus · HN ↗
              > It's lawfare against Constitutionally-protected speech.

              Obscenity is not protected as Free Speech.

              <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;supreme.justia.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;federal&#x2F;us&#x2F;413&#x2F;15&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;supreme.justia.com&#x2F;cases&#x2F;federal&#x2F;us&#x2F;413&#x2F;15&#x2F;

              1. timr · · focus · HN ↗
                ...and porn isn&#x27;t automatically obscenity. In fact, it rarely is. C&#x27;mon, this is the fundamental outcome of the case you&#x27;re citing.

                <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Miller_v._California" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Miller_v._California

                We learn about this in high school.

                1. SoftTalker · · focus · HN ↗
                  I&#x27;m actually surprised that&#x27;s the case. I&#x27;m not opposed to a willing adult making or consuming pornography, but honestly I don&#x27;t see how most of it does not &quot;appeal to the prurient interest&quot; and &quot;lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.&quot;

                  That only leaves whether the material is &quot;patently offensive&quot; which is probably what is most open to interpretation.

                  1. Braxton1980 · · focus · HN ↗
                    I would claim that the vast majority of people in private don&#x27;t believe the majority of porn is offensive
                    1. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

                      [deleted]

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.