The while thing about fining people for using a VPN was rescinded almost immediately, per this NYT article [1] but the press is still running with it everywhere it seems.
"Justice Moraes had also said that any person in Brazil who tried to still use X via common privacy software called a virtual private network, or VPN, could be fined nearly $9,000 a day. But after swift backlash across Brazil, including from academics who have supported him, he reversed that move in an amended order late Friday."
It was not fully rescinded. The VPN ban was temporarily suspended while companies reply to how difficult, damaging and cumbersome it would be to restore VPN apps in case the tribunal stance changes in the future. [1]
Imo, somebody probably told the tribunal how dumb it would be to ban VPN apps since there are some legitimate uses (for example journalism).
Do note that the $8k/day fine still stands, to citizens who use VPN to access X.
He went back on the ban for using VPNs and taking the VPN apps from app stores.
But the main idea of the decision remains, if you're a Brazilian citizen and somehow manage to bypass the ban on X, you can be fined for it. For example, Starlink users can still use X because the company decided to not follow suit, risking to lose their operating license in the country.
My guess, unless you frequently tweet things directed at politicians and government officials, Xandão won't come after you.
Alexandre de Moraes' initial decision also establishes "the application of a daily fine of R$50,000 to individuals and legal entities that engage in conduct involving the use of technological subterfuge to continue communications via 'X', such as the use of VPN". The fine remains in effect.
Rescinded or not, it shows how far the government will go, and how willing they are to abuse their claimed powers. I say “claimed”, because of article 5 section 9 of the Brazil constitution (https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Brazil_2014), citizens and residents have the freedom of expression without censorship, which such a ban obviously violates.
It also signals to companies - domestic and foreign - that this one Supreme Court justice who is issuing secret censorship orders (Alexandre de Moraes) will basically do whatever he wants as far as controlling them. If he’s willing to force Apple and Google to censor their app stores, what else might he or others in the government be capable of? Even if that VPN order is rescinded, Brazil’s business reputation is now damaged. Companies can’t view it with the same stability they expected just a few days ago. It’s a risk to keep any intellectual property or sensitive data there. In other words, you have to take the same precautions you would with the CCP.
I just watched an interview with a lawyer from the Lawyer Bar of SP (OAB-SP), privacy group, and he claims there is a very clear distinction between two types of freedom of speech: one defended by Musk and what's written and allowed by the Brazilian constitution.
The former gives much more freedom, that you can even attack someone else and you're covered by free speech. The first amendment is an US thing only, and it makes the Supreme Court rulings look like censorship.
On the latter case, the Federal Constitution doesn't give as much freedom as the 1st Amendment, and it's also written on it that your freedom of speech has certain limits, and quoting Moraes' own words: "freedom of speech doesn't give you impunity for aggression".
In other words, you have to take the same precautions you would with the CCP.
No, you just need to know the laws of Brazil. Did you know that Marco Civil says service and application providers must have a legal representative in the country? And even if they don't have one, they still have to follow the local laws?
Art. 11. In any operation of collection, storage, retention and treating of personal data or communications data by connection providers and internet applications providers where, at least, one of these acts takes place in the national territory, the Brazilian law must be mandatorily respected, including in regard the rights to privacy, to protection of personal data, and to secrecy of private communications and of logs.
§ 2o The established in Art. 11 applies even if the activities are carried out by a legal entity placed abroad, provided that it offers services to the Brazilian public or at least one member of the same economic group is established in Brazil.
It's ok for X not being allowed to operate in Brazil. But it's NOT OK to fine people in US$ 9K for accessing it via VPN. You're punishing people that didn't do anything otherwise.
> An earlier version of this article misstated how a Brazilian Supreme Court justice amended his order. He cut language ordering Apple and Google to prevent downloads of popular VPN apps in Brazil. He did not cut language saying that people who use VPN apps to access X in Brazil could face fines.
This same exact crowd was cheering on the US banning TikTok. Fascinating how the same folks (yes I looked at the history of some of the people here) have a completely different take with this situation.
Are US citizens going to be punished up to 9k $ if they use vpn to access it? Is tiktok being banned because they didn't censor certain republican or democratic senators?
The US doesn’t need to fine anyone. They have full control over what Apple and Google allow on the AppStore. They also have full control over the infrastructure TikTok uses in the US.
Elon is playing a PR game here to make Brazil look more unreasonable than they are in the court of public opinion.
Sure, there is a problematic aspect of this particular court and judge in Brazil.
But Elon purposefully went beyond non-compliance to get Twitter banned on purpose to amplify his point of view. He closed up the Brazil office that was required to operate in the country.
And before you say that Elon is doing this to fight for free speech, explain how being a “free speech absolutist” jives with his business presence in China, or his own suspension of left-leaning and Musk-critical accounts.
>He closed up the Brazil office that was required to operate in the country.
He said they froze the bank accounts of representatives and he is closing down the offices to protect those people so they wouldn't be retaliated against. If this is the case, would you agree with it being the reasonable choice of action?
Punishing Brazilians by not letting them access Twitter? Hah. Our definitions of punishment are ice ages apart. I’m waiting for Twitter to fail once and for all. Let all social networks go the way of the dodo.
dictatorship? nothing is stopping Brazilians from posting on any other social network that exists or starting their own Brazilian version of twitter...
people think before twitter free speech didn't exist or something
Are you insinuating that banning Twitter after breaking Brazilian law is some kind of slippery slope to banning all networks in Brazil turning it into a no-internet-having hellscape?
That’s a bit extreme no? That’s not what’s happening here. Twitter and Elon apologists seem to think so. I don’t.
As it stands now there are many alternatives for one to get their social media fix.
Elon has learned that in the country where some 20% of his users are that laws exist, judges too, and he and his companies should abide the law. Who does he think he is? Trump? And able to flout all laws and things because he’s rich and powerful?
1 - Wait until X complies with demands (having a legal representative in Brazil and so)
2 - Use some Court order to inform which Brazilians accounts made login during that time
3 - Give time to that users so they prove that whey were outside Brazil during the time
4 - Failing that, there's an assumption that the Brazilian user acessed the X while it was blocked and used some technology to circumvent it
Not that hard. Indeed, very simple, and many users that are trying VPNs right now don't have this tech knowledge to consider the long-term effects of theis actions.
I have seen (multiple times just yesterday) random, vengeful Twitter users from other countries tag Brazilian police and investigators in replies to completely unrelated comments they disagreed with, saying something to the effect of “@op is using Twitter from Brazil, arrest them!”
(How the PD is supposed to be checking their Twitter account amid the blockade, I don’t know.)
They can't, but arguably they don't need to. Look at China, for example.
Personally I'm on social media to talk to my friends. If they block just 1/3rd of my friends, when there's a different non-blocked service my group of friends will move to it. A sort of reverse network effect.
The ban and fine will deter advertisers, anyone making traceable payments, people using their real name, anyone operating a business presence, and anyone straight-laced who believes in following the law. Thanks to this fine, nobody's going to be in a hurry to encourage their friends to get a VPN. And thanks to app stores the state can also get the apps yanked from almost all phones. That's more than enough to trigger the reverse network effect.
The aim here is to either get Twitter to the negotiating table, or to punish them. That's accomplished by blocking 90% of users, the last 10% really won't make a difference either way.
Or because they are searching your computer and/or digital footprint for other reasons.
It’s like seatbelt laws or driving without a license, some offenses exist which are usually identified only because some other potential offense else drew attention.
Meanwhile the fine for driving drunk and endangering people in Brazil is only $500. $9000 for just visiting(not even posting) any Twitter page seems excessive.
What if people that normally use a VPN or a remote job corporate VPN in another country accidently click or get redirected to a Twitter link? Twitter links are all over the web.
List of countries where its illegal to access X: Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela, Brazil and Turkmenistan
Well, not our fault that our laws have provisions for blocking an entire app or service if they fail to comply with the local law. See it as you like, I like to see it as putting Musk in his place and forcing him to comply with the local laws or leave.
If you're going to criticise the Brazilian judiciary, or anyone else for that matter, it's much more effective if you do so with something they're actually doing. Who said anything about defending it?
OK, surely Brazil will fine people who use a VPN to access X no more than, say, 10% of the maximum fine. Brazilians will only have to pay $800 a day for the privilege of viewing this website. That makes it totally OK, right?
"Justice Moraes had also said that any person in Brazil who tried to still use X via common privacy software called a virtual private network, or VPN, could be fined nearly $9,000 a day. But after swift backlash across Brazil, including from academics who have supported him, he reversed that move in an amended order late Friday."
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/30/world/americas/brazil-elo...