Default judgement, absolutely meaningless at this point as to how a court would rule against a plaintiff that actually showed up, respected the court’s authority, and defended itself.
Or did you mean, like, morally?
Doing this at the state court level is as nonsensical as an individual state deciding it doesn't like a law or regulation that's part of the jurisdiction of the FAA or FCC, and wants to do its own unique weird local thing.
And why even a “US federal” court should have such arbitrary and sweeping authority that affects other countries’ businesses and people? The world should realise that “.com” is a US domain in technicality and spirit both (like many other domains)
This is one of the extremely broken aspect of “The Internet”. Large part of it is literally controlled by US with zero oversight or shared authority.
PS. Look at how India recently moved all bank domains to https://<bank name>.bank.in. And I usually don’t agree with my Govt (and for good reason) but this is a proper sovereignty move.
(Oh by the way ICANN is “still” in the US)
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=US+state+...
I’m Canadian and Texas courts have zero authority over me so they can f*ck off.
I don’t agree with the premise of age verification, but of course a prosecutor would go after the assets they can reach if enforcing local laws. They’ve done this for years when it comes to copyright infringement.
There exists a well defined process, precedent and prior case law in US federal court to seize a .COM domain name by a court order issued to VeriSign. Doing this at the state level is entirely new.
Why do you say that?