SAO PAULO (AP) — Elon Musk’s satellite-based internet service provider Starlink backtracked Tuesday and said it will comply with a Brazilian Supreme Court justice’s order to block the billionaire’s social media platform, X.
Starlink said in a statement posted on X that it will heed Justice Alexandre de Moraes’ order despite him having frozen the company’s assets. Previously, it informally told the telecommunications regulator that it would not comply until de Moraes reversed course.
“Regardless of the illegal treatment of Starlink in freezing our assets, we are complying with the order to block access to X in Brazil,” the company statement said. “We continue to pursue all legal avenues, as are others who agree that @alexandre’s recent order violate the Brazilian constitution.”
Pussy. Go on, Elon. Make your companies play chicken with a national government. I’m sure every other national government out there will definitely back you up, because making a company above the law (without paying the requisite bribes) is DEFINITELY something that national governments want to normalize!
Starlink satellites are (quite literally) above the law. Until Brazil develops a space force to go seize them out of orbit, it seems like Elon can do whatever the fuck he wants.
You can jam the signal with very little power, and you can prevent people in Brazil from paying for the service.
Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.
As someone who had a plan until I got hit in the face, I agree.
My plan was to get punched in the face!!! Yet again, I am ahead of the curve!!!
Am I the only one surprised by this? The rich bitch didn’t get away with something?
Why? Like, why for real, not just “this is why this is happening based on the law, bla bla bla”. The law doesn’t apply to this prick.
Elon Musk is picking fights with everyone these days.
Everyone except fascists
Why would he pick a fight with the only group in the world that currently supports him?
Why would he pick fights with himself?
They can think it violates the Brazilian constitution all they like, my understanding is that the supreme court already weighed in on the issue and that’s the only opinion that matters in most countries.
What a braindead take.
You’ve never heard of biased, politically motivated supreme court justices? That’s… hard to believe. You should Google “Roe v Wade” and then check back. How can two different versions of a supreme court rule completely differently on the same issue if the underlying constitution hasn’t changed?
Read the relevant parts of their constitution, then check the supreme courts decision, and let me know how you think it makes sense.
What a braindead take
I love when people call out their own stupidity at the top of their comments
Removed by mod
Sorry, I’m out of the loop. Why did Brazil ban Twitter in the first place?
They were asked to remove people from twitter who violated brazil misinformation laws (something they already do for india, saudi arabia, etc) and in response musk shutdown x offices in Brazil and refused to appoint a legal representative. Brazil then court ordered that X would be blocked since there was no legal way to deal with X.
Musk says its about free speech, when - because its something they already do in other countries - its clearly not about free speech at all.
Typical. Send the lawyers first to intimidate. Then get told you have no case. Then walk back tail between legs.
All while loudly mouthing off
Hey happy Lemmy bday! Nice little cake!
Moraes is brat.
And musk is idiot for refusing to appoint legal representation.
That’s a bummer. I was hoping EU countries would be inspired by Brazil to actually enforce some of their laws and ban Twitter as well.
Edit: as vxx pointed out, there is a positive way to interpret this outcome, and I was probably being needlessly pessimistic.
Am I missing something? twitter is still blocked in brasil. The article is about starlink caving in and blocking it as well for brasilian users.
EU might still block them once they decided he doesn’t comply with the law, and fines didn’t help.
Sorry. To clarify what I meant: the “bummer” is that I want the situation with Starlink, Twitter, and Brazil to result in the permanent downfall of that dogshit site, and severe fines for Starlink so that other countries can look toward Brazil as an example of how to deal with the kinds of social media sites that allow disinformation to propagate.
The fact that Starlink has agreed to comply takes off some of the heat, and therefore leaves some of the territory of fully exploring the legal ramifications of holding reich-wing billionaire freaks somewhat accountable for the shit that their companies do unexplored. Yeah, it’s good that Twitter is still forbidden from operating in Brazil, but I would have liked for Musk to face more repercussions through Starlink as well.
I hope that the EU still takes action against Twitter though, with or without any additional escalation involving Starlink.
I see it as a positive. Elon tried to strong arm the judge but they froze assets to show they’re not to be fucked with. It worked and the billionaire didn’t get away.
Others can still take it as an inspiration or motivation.
Good point. I edited my original comment. Thanks for providing a more positive perspective on this :)
I feel pretty conflicted on this whole thing. Don’t get me wrong, it’s hilarious seeing Elon squirm, but it’s disconcerting to see everyone cheering on government censorship of the internet.
The censorship you’re talking about, was about 6 or 7 accounts that were instrumental in instigating a January 6 style coup attempt in favour of the previous president who lost the election. Those accounts were causing unrest among the population, and were calling for violence in the streets.
Brazil doesn’t look too kindly to that, given it’s history. They wanted those accounts banned. And instead of arguing the legality of banning those accounts in court, musk decided to get all of Twitter/X banned in Brazil.
In other words, it’s Twitter/X’s own fault. They could’ve appointed legal representation and tried to argue that banning those accounts amounted to illegal censorship, but instead of trying that they stuck their head in the sand, like an ostrich, hoping it would blow over, by closing the offices in Brazil and refusing to appoint such legal representation. Leaving the courts no choice but to ban all of Twitter/X.
Typically, I would agree. However, what is happening with Twitter and Brazil isn’t censorship; it’s Twitter refusing to appoint legal council to respond to any legal complaints within Brazil’s jurisdiction. Musk has made the conscious decision to have Twitter not be legally-compliant with Brazil’s laws, therefore Brazil doesn’t allow them to operate there.
However, what is happening with Twitter and Brazil isn’t censorship
The Brazilian government is forcing an ISP to block customers’ access to a specific website. Whether it’s right or wrong is up for discussion, but I can’t accept the claim that this is not censorship.
You can’t operate a business that doesn’t comply with the law. They don’t get a free pass just because their business is a communication service.
Yes but it’s a law that is used for internet censorship.
Then argue against the law, not for a company ignoring the law.
Yes, that’s what is happening here.
You can’t open a restaurant that doesn’t comply with food safety law. This is a “skill issue” on Musk’s part. Not censorship.
Nobody here ever said otherwise.
If Chevron were to start drilling in Brazil without any sort of permits or company representative, you might say that Brazil is within its rights to seize that mining equipment. Would that also be censorship?
Do you consider drilling holes in the ground to be a form of speech?
What kind of “gotcha” is this? Nobody here said anything about Musk’s actions being legal and above board, we are complaining that it is concerning that Brazil has internet censorship laws with real teeth.
internet censorship
All countries have internet censorship. Pretty sure the companies in the US block child porn websites (Not going to check and get put on a watch list). The fact that things can be labeled illegal is not new or controversial. If your issue is with what is being labeled illegal you need to focus on that.
All countries have internet censorship.
Agreed.
If your issue is with what is being labeled illegal you need to focus on that.
My issue is not with any content being labeled illegal. I don’t like the government enacting censorship by ordering ISPs to block certain traffic.
I think that Brazil is within their rights to seize property or assets of entities engaging in illegal activity.
It’s the sort of asymmetric power that concerns me, because by ordering the ISPs around, they can block the entire country’s access to information with the flick of a switch. I don’t want my government getting too comfortable with this kind of power because I don’t know who will wield it next year.
I think ISPs should be dumb pipes. They should not be responsible for censoring content. They shouldn’t even know what they’re transporting, ideally.
The one time I’ll side with musk: it’s in the fucking sky! You can’t block it! It’s not anyone’s jurisdiction.
What a dumb take. They are partaking in the Brazilian economy, are they not? They are accepting payment from Brazilians, providing them with telecommunication services. Distributing terminals. Do you think telecom operators should just have the option to completely ignore the local laws if one aspect of their business crosses an international border?
In the case of providing unblocked internet to the masses? Yes. No government has the right to cut people off from news they aren’t able to suppress.
Do you think a government should have the right to block its citizens from information? This isn’t China we’re talking about, although at this rate there will be a Great Firewall of Brazil in no time.
The government absolutely has the right to cut people off of certain information. If you disagree, try to share some classified secrets, or some child porn and see how well it goes down. The disagreement here is on where the line is drawn on what information falls under that umbrella, and as a sovereign democratic nation, that is Brazil’s call to make, not musk’s or yours. You might have an argument if this was a dictatorship/one party state, but it is not. Still, I’m sure you were equally vocal when Musk was censoring for those.
Doesn’t sound very democratic, but that word gets misused pretty often. Agree to disagree.
Sorry… you think the democratic thing would be to legalize child porn?
isp’s
and even governmentsshould not be in charge of censoring content. child porn and state secrets and even twitter can be illegal without forcing an isp to censor peoples internet. for years I’ve seen lemmy and reddit fight for net neutrality and common carrier status, but as soon as elon is involved the hate boner takes over. lemmy is so weird.How exactly do you take down child porn without censoring it?
If the internet is being used to distribute child porn would you ban the internet?
You can’t just keep banning everything that is used to commit a crime, because criminals will find a way to use everything to commit crimes.
Yeah, that telegram porn accusation is pretty disappointing, but let’s not pretend for a moment that any government actually gives a shit about it. It’s being used to have conversations they can’t see, and that’s why they are using child porn—the silver bullet—to take them down.
If the internet is being used to distribute child porn would you ban the internet?
You would ban the site, and any company refusing to ban the site (FREE SPEECH!!!) would then also be banned.
Democratic doesn’t mean libertarian. Democratic means that everyone gets a voice in deciding the direction things go. The people made their choice at the ballot box, and that was Lula, and Lula seems to be on board with the court’s decision and isn’t inclined to push legislation or executive action to change it. If people decide they don’t like the decision that’s been made, their government will adjust or it will be replaced by another at the ballot box. That’s exactly how it’s supposed to work.
“Supposed to work”
You’re correct—but…
Sure, it’s not as neat and clean as that and I acknowledge that, but at the end of the day, a tautological approach to either free speech or censorship is detrimental in either direction. Worries about censorship going too far ARE justified, but there ARE situations where it is necessary, and more exacting and precise public discussions about and decisions on what is fair game for censorship and what isn’t is the solution, not the understandably visceral reaction to censorship in general.
Twitter isn’t news. Just rumors and mostly useless.
Is anything news anymore? It all seems like a bunch of speculation and rumors. Lots of “something could happen!” Don’t get me started on breakthrough scientific advancements. 🤪
The thing is, if it weren’t for Twitter, and other similar networks, things like Gaza would be squashed by the press.
You decided to shoot your shot at siding with Musk and came up with this? It’s underwhelming.
I’m not siding with musk. I’m siding with a sky internet that doesn’t have to block something because one specific government decides that SOME information isn’t legal for its people. It’s the responsibility of the company to ensure it citizens aren’t using that sky Internet making satellite dishes illegal or something like that.
It’s disappointing musk is involved with both companies. Although he has destroyed Twitter, it is still used by many people to Share information.
It’s about Twitter refusing to comply with a law similar to thousands of other laws they comply with around the world.
In my opinion, it’s because of Lula. Musk has no qualms with abiding the laws of right-wing dictators.
Well, yes, Elon is a fucker. Fine people for using Twitter, but they don’t have the right to make an isp, that can operate in space, ban anything.
This, of course, is my opinion. take it or leave it, I don’t care.
