NKYKev

The problem here is that a domain registration is basically nothing more than a lease and, as an item of property, is totally passable and transferable via a state court judgement. Moreover, as with trademarks, there is law at both the federal and state levels. Of course, the feds can override the states, if they choose to do so - but they have not as of yet.

Basically, the sites themselves are not being attacked - the actions are against the registrars themselves. And if a "valid" court order is issued, and they choose not to follow it, they are taking risks - for example, being sent to jail for violating an injunction - even if the injunction is later overturned. Hell, the case that gave KY the idea involved a patent owner seizing the domain of an "infringer" - thing is, the patent was later found to be invalid! But you guessed it - the other party still lost their domain, as it was a "valid" order when issued.

Simply put, our sites are viewable in KY via hosts all over the world - and through our billing companies - ccbill, epoch, etc. - we sell to KY residents. More than enough to give them jurisdiction - and if they get a judgment there, all they need to do is ask other states to enforce it - if anyone remembers the "Full Faith and Credit" part of the Constitution. Ultimately, ICAAN is in California anyway - subject to US law - so no domain, anywhere, no matter where the registrar is, is fully safe.

Throw in the fact that KY has one of the most anti adult content set of laws on the books anywhere in the US, and yes, I consider it a serious threat. Even if you eventually "win" such a suit, if your registrar transfers to them and it takes years to get back, good luck building up your traffic again - or trying to get damages for your losses against a sovereign entity acting in a state capacity. The registrars may fight this, but a few have already transferred - and if a final judgment and court order is issued, they may have no choice but to do so. And how many years does the appeal process take?

This is what happens when a global medium like the Internet meets "community standards" thinking - but until the feds do something to clarify this, this line of legal reasoning means open season on any content anyone, anywhere, does not feel "appropriate" for their city, no less. If other courts adopt this reasoning, then even mayors - like, say, of Salt Lake City, Utah - can file suits like this. They will argue that they have the right, under "community standards," to demand that content be filtered out for their jurisdiction - and the sad thing is, they very well might win.