@gutocarvalho I accept all of that -- no argument.
But were the fines to be levied on the representative personally (i.e. "If twitter won't pay the fines, we'll make you personally liable for paying them")?
@eibhear @gutocarvalho that is actually what is legally being signed up for when you are the director of a branch of a multinational company
You're not just a mouth piece, you have a responsibility to ensure the company abides by local laws.
@thisismissem @gutocarvalho Yes. But, if the office is shut down, and the judge says: "open that office again so that I can arrest one of your employees because you won't comply with my orders", who would apply for that job?
Imagine if Musk really really wanted to re-open an office in Brazil, who would he get to agree to be sent to jail? Who would have loved ones who would allow them to be sent to prison for Musk. Would Musk actually care if someone went to jail for him? Would he be any less of an asshole?
The operating assumption where any of this is could work is that the office, the staff and the operations all take place within the jurisdiction. But, none of this is true for twitter and Brazil, so it's a bit odd to support the notion of employing someone to be arrested and jailed for Musk's decisions to operate a company (as shittily as he deems fit) in a completely different country.
@eibhear @thisismissem @gutocarvalho
"None of this is true for twitter and Brazil."
Xitter *did* operate in Brazil, since it was made accessible to people in that country. This was a Xitter choice.
Firing all the moderators was also a choice, as was letting in known far-right agitators, neo-Nazis and proponents of open hate speech, while muting/expelling pro-democracy, pro-tolerance, pro-diversity voices.
If you can read a post in a country, the site that post is on operates in that country.
@anarchic_teapot @eibhear @gutocarvalho
Not just that, but also selling and soliciting advertising within the country (i.e., doing business, not just being present on the internet)
@thisismissem @eibhear @gutocarvalho Very true, but the "readable" part is the litmus test. Everything else is just aggravating your case.
@thisismissem @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho I think you're not reading what I'm saying. Let's punish twitter for failing to abide by the laws, and let's punish those who decide that twitter would not obey the law. This is 100% clear, and something I agree with.
What I disagree with is the idea that a member of staff of twitter should be personally held liable -- up to the point of imprisonment -- for Musk's decisions, knowing as we all do that Musk listens to no one when he has a bee in his bonnet.
@eibhear @thisismissem @gutocarvalho
1. Since Musk is the ultimate decision-maker, it is likely he would be the once receiving the sentence, unless it could be should that the country rep was complicit (cue King's Evidence, or whatever the local version is).
2. Why should a country make a specific exception to its local agent laws just because Musk is an egotistical fascist cunt?
@anarchic_teapot @eibhear @thisismissem
I'm pretty sure that our court won't imprision a Brazilian representative, or force him or her to pay twitter fines.
They understand and known who is the real threat, they wont harm someone because of Musk personal war against Brazilian Gov.
But they will prolly close the company in Brazil for good.
@gutocarvalho @eibhear @thisismissem Same here. Ultimately it's the parent company and Musk who are responsible. However, I doubt Musk likes the idea of someone in the country who can tell the authorities what sort of orders he's really sending out.
@thisismissem @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho Ok.
I see your point, but I disagree, and I don't think I can say any more than that.
@eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho
If you are the Managing Director of Twitter GmbH (Germany), and your parent company Twitter, LLC, doesn't allow you to follow german laws, and fines are levied against Twitter GmbH and neither Twitter GmbH nor Twitter LLC can or will pay those fines, then yes, there can be action taken against the Managing Director.
That is, companies offer some liability protection in cases of bankruptcy and such, but not in refusal to follow the law.
@eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho
Your issue isn't with Brazil, STF, or anything, it's with Musk throwing someone who agreed to work with him in good faith under the bus.
Musk knew refusing to comply would mean legal liability for that person, and chose not to comply.
@thisismissem @eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho there’s no sense in defending musk. However, threatening enormous fines on ordinary citizens for simply using his platform or an even just a VPN strikes me as an extreme abuse of power.