mastodon.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

336K
active users

About the X block in Brazil.

Brazilian supreme court were asking X to close/suspend/moderate:

- accounts spreading fake news

- accounts spreading hate speech

- accounts spreading fascism/nazism ideology

- accounts spreading racism

- accounts spreading anti-lgbtqia hate speech

- accounts demanding to close the supreme court

- accounts trying to create disarmony between federal powers, using fake news (executive branch, judiciary branch and legislative branch)

- accounts asking to have another militar dictatorship government instead of democracy

- accounts using free speech to attack judges, legislators, executives and governament branch leaders

- accounts using free speech to haras other people

And a lot, lot more.

They tried several times to talk with them, but twitter refused to comply or respond.

Supreme court is doing their job to secure our Constitution and our Brazilian democracy.

Twitter/X is a toxic non-moderated place right now, it's a risk for us and it's refusing to control their network, it's refusing to comply with Brazilian laws and Brazilian judiciarty court decisions.

That's what's happening.

That's the true.

If you have question I'm here to help!

@gutocarvalho

If you have question I'm here to help!

Ok. I'll bite.

I understand that one of the orders that twitter refused to follow was to appoint a legal representative of twitter in Brazil.

My questions are...

  • Is my understanding correct?
  • If so, what purpose was this legal officer to serve?
  • Was the judge intending to imprison that person if twitter continued to refuse the orders? If so, in what way is that not a human rights violation? Who did the judge think was stupid enough to agree to such an appointment?

@eibhear @gutocarvalho

I don't know if the legal representative would be arrested right away, but they would be under such risk for sure. But I don't see human's right violation there. I don't know what is your country but I would bet that you can be arrested if you refuse to comply with judiciary decisions.

You seem to be arguing that this person would have not the power to comply with the decisions, but if that's the case, this person is not an actual representative, right?

@gutocarvalho @renatofq Content moderation in social media companies is centralized.

The local representative would have nothing more than advisory powers, and we know Musk doesn't take advice.

@eibhear @gutocarvalho

I understand that. But I don't see how someone who cannot make decisions can be a legal representative for a company. Being legal representative is exactly about being legally responsible for it.

The closing of the Twitter office in Brazil was precisely to avoid law enforcement, and Musk said that publicly.

@gutocarvalho @renatofq Which leaves the judge with the course he took.

But to expect that a local representative with no content moderation authority should go to jail for Musk's refusal to take down stuff is horrifying. To expect that a local representative would have content moderation authority is to fail to understand how social media companies work. This is something the judge should not have ordered.

Renato

@eibhear @gutocarvalho

I see your point. But, legally, if someone took the job, they would be signing a paper saying that they take legal responsibility for Musk's decisions in Brazil, since they have no actual power. On the other hand the Judge could rule that the since this person have no actual power they cannot be the legal representative and cannot be indicted... but we are at the realm of speculation now.