:strip_icc()/s02.video.glbimg.com/x720/12862869.jpg)
autotranslated:
Faced with the lack of a legal representative of the social network X in Brazil, the minister of the Supreme Court (STF) Alexandre de Moraes blocked accounts of the company Starlink Holding, which also belongs to billionaire Elon Musk – which provoked a new reaction from the businessman (read more below)
Last week, Moraes considered the existence of a “de facto economic group” under Musk and, on August 18, ordered the blocking of all the financial values of this group in Brazil, to guarantee the payment of fines imposed by the Brazilian Justice against Rede X.
According to aides to the office of Minister Alexandre de Moraes, the other company under Elon Musk in the country – in addition to the X – is precisely Starlink, which operates in Brazil in the sale of internet services by satellite, especially in the North region.
What Starlink is and how does it work
Elon Musk compares Alexandre de Moraes to movie villains
All Starlink leaders in Brazil have already been notified and subpoenaed to also answer for the amounts due to the Brazilian Justice by X.
After the blockade of the accounts, the billionaire returned to criticize Alexandre de Moraes - whom, on Wednesday (28), compared to villains of films (see video above).
In a publication in X on Thursday (29), Musk called the minister “dictator” and said that President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) is conniving with him.
“The tyrant Alexandre [de Moraes] is the dictator of Brazil. Lula is his dog,” Musk wrote in a free translation.
The businessman Elon Musk decided, according to announced on the 17th, to close the X office in Brazil.
The reason is the fact that the company does not agree with the fines imposed by the Supreme Court or with the determination of withdrawal of content published by users on the social network that confront the Democratic State of Law and Brazilian legislation.
Since then, Minister Alexandre de Moraes has gone on to request the businessman to establish a legal representative to officially answer for the acts of the platform. O processo de Elon Musk contra megaempresas por suposto ‘boicote’ ao X — Foto: Getty Images
Elon Musk’s lawsuit against mega-companies for alleged ‘boicote’ to X — Photo: Getty Images
The subpoena in post
On Wednesday (28), Moraes gave 24 hours so that the social network again has a legal representative in the country, under penalty of suspension of service.
The decision was released overnight, in a post on the STF’s profile on X, in response to the company’s post made on August 17 about the closure of the office. On that occasion, in addition to announcing the closure of the office and the withdrawal of its representative from the country, the platform informed that the network would continue to be used in the country.
Many many people now decide whether a story is true or not based on how they feel about Elon rather than the story itself. So yeah - I bet you don’t.
Near as I can tell Musk is being ordered to shut down some accounts based on them spreading misinformation. That’s a dangerous game for any government to get into. That’s why I’m withholding judgement here. Sure - they may be accounts I disagree with - but government censorship should be questioned.
We’ll see how it goes in the EU and the UK
(and the US). If twitter keeps promoting openly unambiguously nazi content, there are laws to deal with that. Brazil just did it sooner because elon boosted the guys questioning electoral results of a very contested election without any evidence.Not in the US there aren’t. And that’s my bias - that sometimes you need to allow shitty people to say shitty things because the alternative can be worse.
this is not about the US, but it may become in November.
I know it’s not about the US. These types of laws can’t pass in the US.
It’s not just misinformation, it’s also the ban in profiles that spread/contribute with the coup attempt.
And the censorship argument used by some people is dumb, we Brazilians have a law about lying and defamation, is just that applied for the internet.
I’m sure you do have a law about it - I’m questioning whether such laws are good.
My problem here is way more that Musk accepts roughly 80% of censorship requests out of totalitarian countries like Turkey, so his claim to be a “free speech absolutist” of some sort is just objectively false; and while government censorship should always be questioned, this is clearly hypocrisy and not actually meant to promote free speech.