Top Brazilian judge orders suspension of X platform in nation:
A Brazilian Supreme Court justice on Friday ordered the suspension of Elon Musk's social media giant X in Brazil after the tech billionaire refused to name a legal representative in the country, according to a copy of the decision seen by The Associated Press
The move further escalates the months long feud between the two men over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation.
Justice Alexandre de Moraes had warned Musk on Wednesday night that X could be blocked in Brazil if he failed to comply with his order to name a representative, and established a 24-hour deadline. The company hasn't had a representative in the country since earlier this month.
In his decision, de Moraes gave internet service providers and app stores five days to block access to X, and said the platform will remain blocked until it complies with his orders. He also said people or companies who use virtual private networks, or VPNs, to access X will be subject to daily fines of 50,000 reais ($8,900).
"Elon Musk showed his total disrespect for Brazilian sovereignty and, in particular, for the judiciary, setting himself up as a true supranational entity and immune to the laws of each country," de Moraes wrote.
Brazil is an important market for X, which has struggled with the loss of advertisers since Musk purchased the former Twitter in 2022. Market research group Emarketer says some 40 million Brazilians, roughly one-fifth of the population, access X at least once per month.
X had posted on its official Global Government Affairs page late Thursday that it expected X to be shut down by de Moraes, "simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents."
"When we attempted to defend ourselves in court, Judge de Moraes threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts," the company wrote. "Our challenges against his manifestly illegal actions were either dismissed or ignored. Judge de Moraes' colleagues on the Supreme Court are either unwilling or unable to stand up to him."
X has clashed with de Moraes over its reluctance to comply with orders to block users.
Accounts that the platform previously has shut down on Brazilian orders include lawmakers affiliated with former President Jair Bolsonaro's right-wing party and activists accused of undermining Brazilian democracy.
Musk, a self-proclaimed "free speech absolutist," has repeatedly claimed the justice's actions amount to censorship, and his argument has been echoed by Brazil's political right. He has often insulted de Moraes on his platform, characterizing him as a dictator and tyrant.
De Moraes' defenders have said his actions aimed at X have been lawful, supported by most of the court's full bench and have served to protect democracy at a time in which it is imperiled. His order Friday is based on Brazilian law requiring foreign companies to have representation in the country so they can be notified when there are legal cases against them.
Given that operators are aware of the widely publicized standoff and their obligation to comply with an order from de Moraes, plus the fact doing so isn't complicated, X could be offline as early as 12 hours after receiving their instructions, said Luca Belli, coordinator of the Technology and Society Center at the Getulio Vargas Foundation, a university in Rio de Janeiro.
The shutdown is not unprecedented in Brazil.
Lone Brazilian judges shut down Meta's WhatsApp, the nation's most widely used messaging app, several times in 2015 and 2016 due to the company's refusal to comply with police requests for user data. In 2022, de Moraes threatened the messaging app Telegram with a nationwide shutdown, arguing it had repeatedly ignored Brazilian authorities' requests to block profiles and provide information. He ordered Telegram to appoint a local representative; the company ultimately complied and stayed online.
X and its former incarnation, Twitter, have been banned in several countries — mostly authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan. Other countries, such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest. Twitter was banned in Egypt after the Arab Spring uprisings, which some dubbed the "Twitter revolution," but it has since been restored.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Captival on Sunday September 01, @04:28PM (3 children)
I can't believe all these awful evil authoritarian regimes are doing the exact same thing we are!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by gnuman on Sunday September 01, @05:39PM (1 child)
Not sure if sarcastic or not.
You can also add to the list most of Middle East during the "Arab Spring" revolutions. But keep in mind that Twitter was completely different from what X is today. On Twitter, you could get banned for hate speech or extremist views. On X today, you are only banned if you mock Musk's ego or try to use his name, parody or not. Or maybe if you link to mastodon.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/business/twitter-ban-social-media-competitors-mastodon.html [nytimes.com]
Nevertheless, Musk is happy to censor in India,
https://www.khaleejtimes.com/world/asia/india-some-x-accounts-blocked-after-government-orders [khaleejtimes.com]
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/x-disagrees-but-says-will-withhold-some-accounts-posts-in-india-as-per-govt-order-101708584102448.html [hindustantimes.com]
so what's the difference when it comes to Brazilian judge? Personal egos?
(Score: 2) by namefags_are_jerks on Wednesday September 04, @02:17PM
> But keep in mind that Twitter was completely different from what X is today.
Yeah, back then, it's largest shareholder was into murdering Journalists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 03, @04:40PM
https://babylonbee.com/news/sad-x-ban-leaves-brazilians-without-reliable-access-to-ai-generated-images-of-elon-musk-and-donald-trump-riding-dinosaurs-through-the-death-star [babylonbee.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by khallow on Sunday September 01, @05:02PM (18 children)
Ok, so this idiot not only complains about the nonsensical concern of mocking Brazilian sovereignty, he will punish anyone who attempts to use Facebook - even though they're not party to this stupid farce? Get rid of him. He's mocking Brazilian sovereignty far more thoroughly.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 01, @08:45PM (17 children)
You need to cut the Brazilians some slack. They don't seem to appreciate the importance of letting Musk pick the political winners and losers like we do in the US.
(Score: 3, Funny) by khallow on Monday September 02, @05:20AM (16 children)
I find it interesting how Musk buys Twitter in 2022 and only two years later he's picking "winners and losers". Is there anything he can't do?
We have a straight-forward case of tyranny here, but someone has to clog the conversation with bullshit. I wonder why?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @01:56PM (15 children)
Reinstating his account, actively campaigning for him on the platform, that bizarre in depth "interview" of him on the platform, throwing the occasional "hiccup" on the Harris account limiting who can follow her, etc. Yes, indeed, he can do a whole lot of stuff in those two years with the policies he's implemented (and which are tanking the platform).
LOL, "tyranny". That word gets thrown around a lot these days. A lot of people who spout it seem to be as knowledgeable about what it means like the other Fox News focus group words like "socialism" and "marxism". It is particularly ironic in that the people spouting it wholeheartedly support a person who refused to leave office after being voted out and tried, illegally, to keep himself in power, which sounds pretty darn tyrannical to me.
The judge clearly told X to name a legal representative in the country, which is what they are required to do by law, and they refused. He told them they will be blocked until they do, and that's what happened. Funny how he's willing to very publicly go to bat for right wing extremism when they are out of power, but he'll gladly bend over the barrel and capitulate to, say, the Chinese. "But he has to for business reasons!", of course, but it would seem that being cut off in a very important market for X, that they would want to make smart business decisions here too (however, he's not fighting right wing extremism opposition in China, so there's that difference).
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @02:43PM (7 children)
Odd how progressive left attitudes change when the boot is on the other foot. Musk bought Twitter because he was sick of being censored. Now, you accuse Musk of doing the very things progressives were doing to him. But, it was perfectly reasonably when your side had it's thumb on the censorship scales. I suppose you also object to Gab and Truth Social for the same reasons - your team doesn't control them.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday September 02, @02:53PM (6 children)
Honestly, I'm not sure i follow your logic.
I don't like being hit, therefore I am going to hit people. I don't like being robbed, therefore I am going to rob people, etc, etc.
If he was that sick of something why would he feel better by doing it to everyone else? If you are against something why would you want to do it yourself?
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Monday September 02, @03:15PM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by weirsbaski on Tuesday September 03, @02:45AM (3 children)
Musk bought Twitter in 2022, in the middle of the (still ongoing) Biden presidency. I have no proof to back this claim, but I suspect if Trump wins 2024 then we'd find out real fast that Musk is a-ok with a wide swath of government-picked censorship as long as the guy in charge is on "his side".
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 03, @03:42AM (2 children)
Ok then. I'll note however that pre-Musk Twitter's actions were real, while post-Musk future X's actions are purely hypothetical.
(Score: 2) by weirsbaski on Tuesday September 03, @04:38AM (1 child)
Not purely hypothetical, he already started censoring for "his side" :
https://news.yahoo.com/news/musks-x-censors-coverage-trumps-195723761.html [yahoo.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 03, @12:06PM
(Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 02, @06:40PM
As Khallow suggests, Musk's X is not part of a vast left wing conspiracy acting at the behest of government. That is the essential difference between what Musk is doing, and what Twitter did. Does that make Musk's censorship right? No, but it makes Musk's censorship far less objectionable.
A MAN Just Won a Gold Medal for Punching a Woman in the Face
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday September 02, @03:04PM (5 children)
Reinstating Trump's account? "throwing the occasional 'hiccup' on the Harris account limiting who can follow her"? Do you ever listen to yourself? First, it was Musk picking winners and losers. Now it's fallen to allowing Trump back on Twitter/X and alleged minor interference with Twitter/X mechanisms.
Two obvious rebuttals here. First, X is not under the judge's jurisdiction. So they can simply just not comply quite legally. Given the potentially very expensive and corrupt bullshit involved here, they might even be required to refuse to comply so by the company's bylaws and the laws of the US.
Now consider the second sentence. This should sound like blatant tyranny to you. Here's why. In a real court case, a judge only has power over the participants. Usually, it's things like ordering the various parties not to talk about certain details of the case, fining someone for misbehavior, or similar. But get this:
He's ordering an entire country of 200 million people to stop trying to access X with daily fines, if they refuse. Where in this court trial are the people of Brazil? Are they the defendants? Prosecutors? Bailiffs and other members of law enforcement? No, they're innocent bystanders getting screwed by a power-tripping judge who has no business issuing such an order. Fire the dude before he does something worse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @04:16PM (2 children)
I'm curious why you have a cognitive disconnect with this. Actively using the platform as a campaign surrogate for Trump isn't trying to sway the election, particularly after changing the algorithms to force Musk's messages on everyone whether they've blocked him or not? If you think I literally meant that Musk thinks he has the sole power to pick the winners and losers (as super cool as that would be, I'm sure) than you took me far too literally. But using his platform to get involved with undermining a foreign government is a bit extreme, don't you think? He should at least have the backing of the CIA or something. How about him threatening the judge? Can you imagine a foreign company issuing grave threats to specific US judges, particularly supreme court judges? It is fortunate for him that he sucks up to leaders like Putin because some people have had a tendency to accidentally fall out of hospital windows in the past.
He's also ignoring the sovereignty of another country in saying that he refuses to block X over Starlink. I know he's a cool tech bro and all, and is clearly the smartest person in history, but messing around in the business of other countries can be a dangerous game, like his earlier attempts in trying to win the war for Putin (and let us not forget his shining statesmanship in advocating a peaceful end to the war by suggesting that Russia should keep all land they've captured when they invaded).
You also seem to be quite knowledgeable on Brazilian law. I don't claim to know what the jurisdiction of of the Brazilian courts are other than what I've read and how they've blocked other internet services when they've acted outside specific Brazilian laws, which seems to be the case here.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 03, @02:25AM
There would need to be cognitive dissonance first, in order for me to have it. So far nobody has shown this is a problem here.
X presently is a campaign surrogate for Harris's campaign too. Is he also swaying the election for her as a result? What are "Musk's messages"?
I can only go by what you wrote. So you write something differently now? I'm fine with the correction, but I have yet to hear why you wrote that FWIW.
If he did that, then you might have a point. Maybe. Nothing I've read to this point from you, the author of the story, or anyone else indicates these are real problems.
Interesting how you've suddenly inserted the red herring of Russia into this. The only messing around that appears to be going on is that X isn't complying with Judge de Moraes's attempt to silence his political enemies. Now, that de Moraes has not only threatened every ISP in Brazil and the entire population, we see who ignores whose sovereignty. It's not Musk that is the problem here.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 03, @02:28AM
In other words, you're signaling that you don't know shit. This is a simple matter of ethics and competence. A judge acting legally and fairly would both respect jurisdiction and not impose bullshit on 200 million people just because he isn't getting his way. Fire him.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @04:17PM (1 child)
Your last point is old news and is not true.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 03, @02:30AM
And yet we have from the story:
This order was issued on Friday, 8/27. So not old news either. I rest my case.
(Score: 2) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 02, @10:30PM
What planet do you live on? It's not Earth, because in the last decade the only example here of what you're claiming occurred in Venezuela.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Sunday September 01, @05:23PM (1 child)
whether Brazilians are lucky or missing out.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by AnonTechie on Sunday September 01, @08:22PM
Something to ponder about. In other news:
Brazil’s X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky [theverge.com]
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 01, @05:41PM (8 children)
He will do whatever is necessary to circumvent the blockade, through VPNs, IPSEC, bittorrent, blockchain, whatever it takes to show that nobody has the right to regulate content on the internet. Now is the time to fight back against tyranny
Turns out this Lula guy is no better than his predecessor, just as fascist, may as well have kept him locked up.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by epitaxial on Sunday September 01, @06:51PM (7 children)
If Musk really wants to support free speech he would stop punishing accounts bold enough to say the word cisgender https://www.advocate.com/news/cisgender-restriction-x-twitter [advocate.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 01, @07:07PM (2 children)
Cisgender is a meaningless term that wastes bandwidth, and brain cells.
Acceptance by whom, exactly?
(Score: 1, Troll) by epitaxial on Sunday September 01, @07:50PM (1 child)
Everyone but Elon.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by EEMac on Sunday September 01, @10:05PM
The word is "normal". Evil has been determined to destroy the concept of "normal" for decades now. It still exists.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 01, @08:26PM (1 child)
He's a "free speech absolutist"! You're not telling me he's a lying sack of something, are you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @06:20PM
Goes without mentioning, doesn't it?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday September 02, @03:21PM
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Tuesday September 03, @12:19AM
Does he even know what 'cisgender' means?
(Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 02, @02:47PM (4 children)
Too bad that VPNs don't work in Brazil. If VPNs worked down there in the southern hemisphere, a lot of Brazilians would just continue doing whatever the hell they want to do. Surely there must be a technological solution to flip electrons upside down, so they work with northern hemisphere VPNs?
A MAN Just Won a Gold Medal for Punching a Woman in the Face
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 02, @05:14PM (3 children)
I find that hard to believe. Are you saying there is not a single VPN service in Brazil? That would be pretty impressive to block them all, and depressing to think that they all can be blocked. Well, people can always smuggle in Starlink receivers. We have the power, we really should help people break through the blockades. Corrupt law be damned!
(Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 02, @05:22PM (2 children)
I didn't think I really needed a sarcasm tag on my post. Come on man, upside down electrons? Maybe I can interest you in a bargain on magic smoke?
A MAN Just Won a Gold Medal for Punching a Woman in the Face
(Score: 2) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 02, @10:40PM (1 child)
Don't assume. As Benny Hill taught, it makes an ass out of u and me.
Many people are not intelligent enough to understand a clever remark, and others deliberately misunderstand. Try not to give them an plausible excuse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 03, @05:12PM
clever remark
*cough* right
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Monday September 02, @07:07PM (3 children)
So, there's an update
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/9/2/ban-on-elon-musks-x-platform-upheld-by-brazil-supreme-court [aljazeera.com]
So this is no longer "a" judge, but the Supreme Court. And the reason is mostly Musk thumbing his nose at them and saying "you can't touch me!". Very petty.
(Score: 2) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 02, @10:43PM
Yes indeed, the Brazilians are being very petty.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 04, @04:53AM (1 child)
He could have kept X up in Brazil through Starlink, but, in typical fashion, he chickened out [yahoo.com]. I think an American official told him to shut it down.
We have no real free speech advocates of any consequence, just lip service
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 05, @06:44PM
Flamebait
Case in point