“The company has immunity in relation to third-party content, but to do so, it must comply with court decisions”
X, formerly Twitter, has just closed its office in Brazil. Announced on Saturday (17), the decision reflects the clash with the Brazilian justice system, which is closing in on the platform purchased by businessman Elon Musk in 2022 and renamed X last year. Despite the closure of the operation, the service will remain available to Brazilian users.
“This is a scenario that is becoming a reality. It is not surprising, because Musk does not want to comply with court decisions. We are talking about investigations into information from the PCC, and not just about issues involving freedom of expression. Musk is hindering judicial investigations. Obviously, care must be taken; the judiciary must follow guidelines and controls to avoid abuse of power and protect freedom of expression. But we are talking about obstruction of investigations,” observes Yasmin Curzi, professor at FGV Direito Rio.
On August 15, Judge Alexandre de Moraes, a minister of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), increased the amount of the fine, after X failed to comply with the Court’s order to remove the profile of Senator Marcos do Val (Podemos-ES) from the air, in addition to other accounts investigated by the Federal Police (PF) for posts with antidemocratic content and offenses against authorities. The amount increased from R$50,000 to R$200,000 per day.
“This letter demands the censorship of popular accounts in Brazil, including a pastor, a current member of parliament and the wife of a former member of parliament. We believe the Brazilian people deserve to know what is being asked of us,” published X’s global affairs page, referring to the text with Moraes’s order.
“The judiciary has every right to pressure the company to provide the requested information, according to the Internet Civil Rights Framework,” explains Yasmin, who also recalls the misinformation spread by X. “According to article 19 of the Internet Civil Rights Framework, the company has immunity in relation to third-party content, but to do so, it must comply with court decisions. Otherwise, it is committing an illegal act,” she warns.
OX claims that the exit from Brazil protects its executives. “Despite the fact that our numerous appeals to the Brazilian Supreme Court have not been heard, that the Brazilian public has not been informed about these orders, and that our Brazilian team has no responsibility or control over the blocking of content on our platform, Moraes chose to threaten our team in Brazil instead of respecting the law or due process,” X argues in a statement.
“This decision to close X’s office in Brazil was difficult, but if we agreed to @alexandre’s secret (illegal) censorship and demands to transfer private information, there would be no way to explain our actions without feeling ashamed,” Musk said.
“If there is a request to remove content that violates rights, not only personality rights, but also copyright, which has also been happening a lot at X, the company becomes responsible,” insists Yasmin.
Clash
In April, Elon Musk and Alexandre de Moraes exchanged barbs about censorship and regulation of platforms. Musk asked Alexandre de Moraes: “Why are you demanding so much censorship in Brazil?”
The provocation was launched in a post on Moraes’ official X profile, which praised the appointment of Ricardo Lewandowski as Minister of Justice and Public Security. Musk then launched a series of complaints. He said that the platform “was forced, by court decisions, to block popular accounts in Brazil”, and that all would be reactivated. He also threatened to close the Brazilian office.
Moraes’ reaction came the following day. The Supreme Court justice opened an investigation against Musk, determining a daily fine of R$100,000 per unblocked profile if the platform fails to comply with the court orders. Elon Musk also began to be investigated in the Digital Militias Inquiry. According to Moraes, Musk organized a disinformation campaign about the work of the Supreme Court and the Superior Electoral Court (TSE), inciting “disobedience and obstruction of justice, including in relation to criminal organizations.”
In Brazil, the Federal Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, but prohibits anonymity. If a person breaks the law or causes an offense, they will be held liable for damages. But the Internet makes its own rules, covered up by platforms that profit from controversy. The economic power fueled by algorithms and data would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.
The imbroglio led to the abandonment of bill 2630/20, which would create the Brazilian Law of Freedom, Responsibility and Transparency on the Internet, known as the Fake News Bill. Arthur Lira (PP-AL), president of the Chamber of Deputies, proposed the formation of a group that will work for about 30 to 40 days to format a new text to regulate social networks. The goal is to hold big tech companies accountable for harmful content, in addition to studying rules for the use of artificial intelligence.
