The SCOTUS has sided with the State of Texas. Can Steam be blocked?

[xBCxRangers]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/30/politics/supreme-court-texas-porn-age-verification/index.html

"Texas’ law requires any website that publishes a substantial amount of content that is “harmful to minors” to verify the age of users. The challengers said the law also forces adults to identify themselves before accessing pornography, which the group’s lawyers said violates access to free speech online".

The challengers, have lost.

There were no dissents.

We've had these conversations before, but it has now been verified, States do have Rights as to protect children from sites, in regards to adult content.

We all have our opinions on these matters, but it seems, these matters are, or will hit closer to home before long.

Steam has adult content, the question seems to only be what "substantial" means, or may mean, or how that is construed by states.

Should Steam require ID, like a DL, or State ID what not to access certain game hubs, or it's site itself?

[The nameless Gamer]

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Messaggio originale di The nameless Commander:

Steam can just block adult games for Texas like they did for Germany and be done with it.

Germany is a whole region, a state within a region is a bit different.

That's a bit troublesome. Though I seriously doubt Valve would implement an ID-reading feature for a single state if they chose not to for an entire country with a much larger population. It would open a can of worms which could, worst case, be resolved by delisting enough AO games to get Steam under the threshold for it to be affected by the law in question and that's assuming it IS above the threshold to begin with, which I seriously doubt.

That said, American busybodies freaking out about the "birds and bees" never ceases to amuse me.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

The SC has given states the green light, to prohibit or otherwise provide age of verification for such matters.

Again no they haven't. They haven't ruled on anything. They just said they aren't going to pause anything and the appeal is going to proceed as normal. They haven't ruled either way which is normal.

The Supreme Court has not been asked to rule on this at all. They were asked to FREEEZE the law during the appeal. it has to go thru the lower courts first before they would even consider hearing it.

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Well, that's a point, but def up to interpretation

Not really, steam would have to have at least 1/3 of their games be pornographic. That is very clearly listed in the requirements to be included and the reason Texas hasn't tried to sue Steam, Fanatical, Humble, or other sites that sell keys or adult games.

if your going to argue over laws you should really read them and be familiar with them first.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di The nameless Commander:

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Germany is a whole region, a state within a region is a bit different.

That's a bit troublesome. Though I seriously doubt Valve would implement an ID-reading feature for a single state if they chose not to for an entire country with a much larger population. It would open a can of worms which could, worst case, be resolved by delisting enough AO games to get Steam under the threshold for it to be affected by the law in question and that's assuming it IS above the threshold to begin with, which I seriously doubt.

That said, American busybodies freaking out about the "birds and bees" never ceases to amuse me.

Steam isn't remotely above the threshold. OP should do some basic evidence gathering. I'll do it for him though

Searching for all games with adult titles on gives me 98,616 games
Searching for all games with adult titles off gives me 93,949 games

Basic math shows you that is under 5,000 adult games, well under the threshold that would require them to have 30,000+ to be counted.

[xBCxRangers]

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

The SC has given states the green light, to prohibit or otherwise provide age of verification for such matters.

Again no they haven't. They haven't ruled on anything. They just said they aren't going to pause anything and the appeal is going to proceed as normal. They haven't ruled either way which is normal.

The Supreme Court has not been asked to rule on this at all. They were asked to FREEEZE the law during the appeal. it has to go thru the lower courts first before they would even consider hearing it.

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Well, that's a point, but def up to interpretation

Not really, steam would have to have at least 1/3 of their games be pornographic. That is very clearly listed in the requirements to be included and the reason Texas hasn't tried to sue Steam, Fanatical, Humble, or other sites that sell keys or adult games.

if your going to argue over laws you should really read them and be familiar with them first.

Where does it say it has to go thru the lower court? They overruled the lower court, and have sided with TX.

As far as how folks read the law, speaking of which, where did you go to Law School, and where do you practice?

[Boblin the Goblin]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Even if the law wasn't appealed, Steam would not qualify. Here[capitol.texas.gov] are the parameters laid out in the bill for a website to fall under the bill for age verification;



Before Steam would even be considered, they would have to have at least 1/3 of the games on here be straight pornographic. That would be close to 30,000 games.

Well, that's a point, but def up to interpretation, of what even construes such material, and what state or states. now, and in the future may deem it to be.

Are someone, even AI "naked" considered to be construed as such material, or those in a game having relations of such a nature construed as such? If so, i would think more than one third of Steams games do meet that criteria.

It's all up to ones interpretation.

The SC has given states the green light, to prohibit or otherwise provide age of verification for such matters.

It literally isn't up to interpretation.

That is the parameter. That's why it says that specifically.

[xBCxRangers]

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Well, that's a point, but def up to interpretation, of what even construes such material, and what state or states. now, and in the future may deem it to be.

Are someone, even AI "naked" considered to be construed as such material, or those in a game having relations of such a nature construed as such? If so, i would think more than one third of Steams games do meet that criteria.

It's all up to ones interpretation.

The SC has given states the green light, to prohibit or otherwise provide age of verification for such matters.

It literally isn't up to interpretation.

That is the parameter. That's why it says that specifically.

It mentions 'sexual content". That is up to interpretation as to how that is construed. What is also up to interpretation, is how many other states will follow, and my guess is, many.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Even if the law wasn't appealed, Steam would not qualify. Here[capitol.texas.gov] are the parameters laid out in the bill for a website to fall under the bill for age verification;



Before Steam would even be considered, they would have to have at least 1/3 of the games on here be straight pornographic. That would be close to 30,000 games.

Well, that's a point, but def up to interpretation, of what even construes such material, and what state or states. now, and in the future may deem it to be.

Are someone, even AI "naked" considered to be construed as such material, or those in a game having relations of such a nature construed as such? If so, i would think more than one third of Steams games do meet that criteria.

It's all up to ones interpretation.

The SC has given states the green light, to prohibit or otherwise provide age of verification for such matters.

You really need to read your source.

The only thing SCOTUS did was deny putting it on hold while it's appealed. They didn't give the green light since there is no ruling for the law itself.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

It literally isn't up to interpretation.

That is the parameter. That's why it says that specifically.

It mentions 'sexual content". That is up to interpretation as to how that is construed. What is also up to interpretation, is how many other states will follow, and my guess is, many.

It also defines sexual content. That of which falls into the "adult content" tag on Steam.

Which, as Brian showed, only makes up about 5,000 games out of the 90,000+.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

Where does it say it has to go thru the lower court?

Did you not read your own article?

A trade group representing the adult entertainment industry filed an appeal at the Supreme Court and then asked the court to block the law while that appeal is considered. The underlying appeal is still pending.

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

They overruled the lower court, and have sided with TX.

No they haven't. They are appealing a ruling from the 5th US circuit court of appeals and issued an emergency request asking the Supreme court to halt the enforcement of the law while they are appealing. The supreme court declined to block it and the original appeal is still going on. They haven't overturned any lower courts.

The entire case was brought to the Supreme Court because the porn industry was trying to overrule the lower courts. If they overruled the lower court that would have meant that they sided AGAINST TX.

You have your facts completely mixed up again and aren't reading the article.

The emergency request followed a 2-1 decision last month from the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals that cited Texas’ “legitimate interest in preventing minors’ access to pornography” and allowed the law to take effect.

The article even told you they were appealing the lower court that AGREED with the law, a court that has a repeated history of having first ammendment appeals overturned when escalated.

Now you are probably thinking of something else the article mentions in which the 5th US Circuit ignored a previous supreme court ruling which is why TX is likely to lose on appeal

The Supreme Court in 1997 unanimously invalidated provisions of a federal law intended to protect minors from indecent material online because it also imposed First Amendment burdens on adults.

[Thiesen]

You don't have to stae your birth date..

I just tells Steam that I am born the 1st of January 1900...

Yup... I am legit 124 years old... :-)

[The nameless Gamer]

So unless the threshold gets lowered, Steam remains unaffected.

[xBCxRangers]

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

It mentions 'sexual content". That is up to interpretation as to how that is construed. What is also up to interpretation, is how many other states will follow, and my guess is, many.

It also defines sexual content. That of which falls into the "adult content" tag on Steam.

Which, as Brian showed, only makes up about 5,000 games out of the 90,000+.

Well, respectfully he has been wrong too many times (as he ended up again here), and that's why i asked where he practiced law. He really shouldn't opine on matters for which he has no knowledge.

The matter here, is you or i cannot interpret, whatever "Steam" may categorize something as such, that the State of Texas, or others would agree.

That is Mr Newells or Valves determination, or yours. as to what" Adult Content" may be. Not the State of Texas or others.

[Brian9824]

This article has a much more detailed description - https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-pornography-age-verification-texas-9c31eca983bdb30d3696cd4c5891a392

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to block a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of their users.

The justices rejected an emergency appeal filed by the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry. The provision of House Bill 1181, signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott, remains in effect even as the association’s full appeal is weighed by the Supreme Court.

They haven't issued their ruling on any of the appeals, but I do stand corrected, the appeal is going to be thru the Supreme Court, you picked the most poorly worded article I 've ever seen.

The appeal has not been done yet and no ruling has been issued and they have not sided with TX.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di xBCxRangers:

He really shouldn't opine on matters for which he has no knowledge.

One shouldn't post false claims about the Supreme court siding with texas or ruling against people when you don't know the difference between a ruling and declining to put a law on hold while its appealed.

You've made so many false claims as a result of not reading your sources so many times and you continue to make the same errors over and over. Please READ your articles before you make false claims.

[A Gamer]

You can’t watch ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ at Texas. Sucks for you brother, they can take away out beer, they can take away our ability to watch naked women on our phones, but I’ll put my foot down if they take away our hentai games. God bless America.