• 1 Post
  • 85 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
Cake day: October 21st, 2023
  • sorter_plainview@lemmy.todaytoWorld News@lemmy.world•Lula says Elon Musk’s wealth does not mean world must accept his ‘far-right free-for-all’English
    202·
    13 days ago

    Can you share where you saw “threatening to arrest and froze bank account”? Twitter made a post on their own page about something along the line. Other than that I couldn’t find any.

    The resignation of the legal representative has more nuance than what you said here. His (not her) name is Diego de Lima Gualda, an attorney in Brazil. After a series of non compliance from Twitter, the Twitter Brazil filed a request arguing that the Twitter international is responsible for compliance and Twitter Brazil does not have authority. The judge dismissed this request for obvious reasons, and the next day he resigned from the position.

    The non compliance led to resignation. This is crucial because the actions of Twitter are the reason why the legal representative faced the consequences. Not that the judge ordered something out of the blue. I think you are missing the key point here.

    Obviously censorship is bad. There is no contention in that. My point is this order is the last one in the long standing feud between Musk and Moraes. Musk has been so aggressive in personally attacking the judge. So portraying the judge as someone going on a power trip is not the accurate picture.

    Edit: Adding more info here. The entire information on the freezing bank account and arrest of the legal representative of Twitter Brazil, is from the Twitter Global Affairs handle. They published a “secret order” from the judge. A few things I noticed are these looks like cherry picked pages of a bigger document due to lack of continuity between page 1 and 2. Usually court orders will include the full context of the petition. Second point is the obvious circumventing strategy the Global Affairs of Twitter also states. They reiterate that only “Twitter International” is responsible for compliance, and not “Twitter Brazil”. This absurd argument introduces the problem of jurisdiction. This is just Twitter trying to fly above the law.

    Earlier I said the legal representative was Diego de Lima Gualda, after his resignation they informed that Rachel de Oliveira Vila Nova Conceição will be the new representative. The order says:

    indicates that the representative of the company X BRASIL INTERNET LTDA., RACHEL DE OLIVEIRA VILLA NOVA CONCEIÇÃO, acting in bad faith, is trying to avoid the regular notification of the decision handed down in the proceedings, including by electronic means, of which she has already demonstrated knowledge, with the aim of frustrating its compliance.

    Therefore, given the negative ruling of the summons and the reported impossibility of contacting the legal representative of the aforementioned company, I DETERMINE THAT the lawyers legally appointed by X BRASIL INTERNET LTDA. be IMMEDIATELY INTIMATED, including electronic means, so that they adopt the necessary measures to comply with the order, within 24 (twenty-four) hours, under penalty of:

    (1) DAILY FINE OF R$20,000.00 (twenty thousand reais) to company administrator, RACHEL DE OLIVEIRA VILLA NOVA CONCEIÇÃO (CPF 255.747.418-57), CUMULATIVE THAT IMPOSED ON THE COMPANY, as well as DECREE OF PRISON for disobeying a court order;

    I think these words are self explanatory. Twitter tried to delay the compliance just by making the legal representative unreachable. This along with the argument that Twitter Brazil is not responsible shows a clearer picture of what Twitter was trying to do and what actually happened. Again I don’t see where the “bank account freezing” is written.

    Edit 2: I forgot to state the obvious. The representative who resigned is not the one who faced fines or “decree of prison”. These are two different representatives. Again the representative is facing this because of the actions of Twitter. This is not a case of judicial activism.