539
submitted 2 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 163 points 2 months ago

Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 33 points 2 months ago

As someone who had a plan until I got hit in the face, I agree.

[-] Samvega 29 points 2 months ago

My plan was to get punched in the face!!! Yet again, I am ahead of the curve!!!

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

Some people plan to get punched in the face. Don't kink shame.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 124 points 2 months ago

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!

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 87 points 2 months ago

Typical. Send the lawyers first to intimidate. Then get told you have no case. Then walk back tail between legs.

[-] uienia@lemmy.world 39 points 2 months ago

Sounds a bit like how he ended up with twitter in the first place

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I love that he is so stupid that he didn't realize he could back out of a legality by saying, "LOL JK."

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

All while loudly mouthing off

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 75 points 2 months ago

Elon Musk is picking fights with everyone these days.

[-] TheBat@lemmy.world 77 points 2 months ago
[-] Tyfud@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago

Why would he pick a fight with the only group in the world that currently supports him?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Thrillhouse@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

I wonder when he’ll go to rehab. He’s so unhinged.

[-] buttfarts@lemy.lol 17 points 2 months ago

He's testing the limits of "fuck you" money expect "you" are national governments

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 63 points 2 months ago

Glad he got bitch-slapped on this one.

[-] trevor 53 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

[-] vxx@lemmy.world 41 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

[-] trevor 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

[-] vxx@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 months ago

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.

[-] trevor 45 points 2 months ago

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.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

It's not suppression of speech. It's the consequence of refusal to even acknowledge the legitimacy of the Courts by refusing to appoint council.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Yeller_king@reddthat.com 45 points 2 months ago

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Icalasari@fedia.io 33 points 2 months ago

How long until Elon throws a fit and fires people at Starlink until they ignore judge's orders?

[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 32 points 2 months ago

I'm guessing the Starlink investors had a chat with him about a potential breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit. That's a stupid concept but Musk isn't going to win if he deep sixes Starlink for his petty vendetta.

[-] Icalasari@fedia.io 15 points 2 months ago

Eh, still feels like a good chance he'd let his ego get in the way of sanity

[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago

Oh i'm sure he argued with them. Starlink didn't back down right away, after all...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 30 points 2 months ago

Dude finally found an immovable object outside of US.

[-] chemicalprophet@lemm.ee 20 points 2 months ago

Loser losing again…

[-] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pyre@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago
[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
539 points (100.0% liked)

News

23353 readers
2757 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS