Elon Musk-controlled satellite internet provider Starlink has told Brazil’s telecom regulator Anatel it will not comply with a court order to block social media platform X in the country until its local accounts are unfrozen.

Anatel confirmed the information to Reuters on Monday after its head Carlos Baigorri told Globo TV it had received a note from Starlink, which has more than 200,000 customers in Brazil, and passed it onto Brazil’s top court.

Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes last week ordered all telecom providers in the country to shut down X, which is also owned by billionaire Musk, for lacking a legal representative in Brazil.

The move also led to the freezing of Starlink’s bank accounts in Brazil. Starlink is a unit of Musk-led rocket company SpaceX. The billionaire responded to the account block by calling Moraes a “dictator.”

  • Woht24@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    He absolutely shouldn’t, but isn’t this just a dick swinging contest by both Brazil and Musk?

    I haven’t been following it but banning an entire website because they don’t have a ‘legal representative’ in your country sounds bizarre.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Twitter did have an office in Brazil (with legal representation) but after refusing to implement court ordered bans, the court fined them. Elon Musk threw a temper tantrum and shut down the Brazil office and eliminated his legal representation in Brazil.

      Note that Musk will implement bans when requested by authoritarians, just for some reason he draws the line when it’s a court order in a democratic country.

      Anyway the situation where Twitter doesn’t have legal representation is a situation Elon Musk created. Basically “I fired my lawyers so there’s nothing you can do against me now! Checkmate!” So Brazil says “fine, I guess we’re banning Twitter then…”

      So Space Karen thinks the the law doesn’t apply to him and it’s going to cost him a lot of money. Again.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It is when the law says that for a company to operate in Brazil it has to have an appointed legal representative, and you close down your offices and refuse to re-appoint one when the judge demands you to.
      Musk entered a “No pants no service” restaurant, took his pants off, was told to put them back on and refused, and is now surprised he gets no service.

      • Woht24@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t know what you thought I said to begin your comment with ‘it is’, because if you’re agreeing it’s a dick swinging contest, then the rest of your comment seems strange.

        Anyway, fair enough - like I said, I have not been following it.

      • sczlbutt@lemmy.pubsub.fun
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        Shut down the offices and evacuated employees when threatened with arrest. There’s a whole lot more to this story…

        • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          That’s what Musk tells, the reality the legal representative alone could be arrested because Musk don’t want to pay the fines, the employees just lost their jobs because Musk don’t want to spend 0.00001% of his wealth.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I mean, yes, when you are the legal representative for a company, that is what might happen when the company breaks the local laws and refuses to comply with court orders. That’s kinda the whole point.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think that’s a bit reductive.

      It’s fair enough to expect a large company to have a rep to attend court if they want to do business in your country.

      If they refuse then it becomes a “rule of law” situation - even if it’s a dumb law, you can’t have a multinational disregard the court’s instructions.

    • Lautaro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      It was banned because they refused to comply with anti-hate speech policies. According to musk, moderating his platform would be “political persecution” against those poor nazis.