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.”

  • Trailblazing Braille Taser
    link
    fedilink
    -414 days 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4414 days 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.

      • Trailblazing Braille Taser
        link
        fedilink
        -714 days ago

        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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1814 days ago

          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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          514 days ago

          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?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1914 days 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      It’s not just hilarious. Twitter gives him way, way too Mich influence and power. It’s critical that stops.

      Starlink to an extent, too.

      Agree with you that I am conflicted though.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      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 its 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.

    • @fuzzzerd
      link
      English
      -1214 days ago

      I’m not even that conflicted, those cheering any government censorship are misguided at best.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        914 days ago

        those cheering any government censorship

        Child porn is illegal, that is also government censorship.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        Had X wanted to argue this in court, they should’ve appointed legal representation, instead of closing all of their Brazil offices.