> The objection is not that the order is lawless, but that the .com registry on American soil hands American courts a switch for the whole internet, and a Travis County judge has now thrown it. [...] using American infrastructure, with its supposed First Amendment protections, are of no use here when a Texas judge can order a site taken down for hosting legal content, because it did not introduce digital ID features.

Does this mean almost everybody has to arrange an alternate domain name now, to avoid their online presence being destroyed by the whim of any US state which they don't even do business in?