5 ms·
> The decision imposes a daily fine of R$50,000 (£6,800) on individuals and companies that attempt to continue using X via VPN. Fining even users is a bit surp
by eatonphil 2y ago
> The decision imposes a daily fine of R$50,000 (£6,800) on individuals and companies that attempt to continue using X via VPN.
Fining even users is a bit surprising.
- blurbleblurble 2y agoHow can a court arbitrarily impose fines on users like this?
- Fabricio20 2y agoThe goal is that it's a scare tactic. There is no technical way that these fines could be imposed at large, outside of say, people outing themselves publicly or similar. This is the same wording that was used when they blocked Whatsapp.
- exe34 2y agocollaborating with a law breaker in contempt of court.
- stufffer 2y agoLaws don't even seem to be applicable at this point. It is one supreme court justice that is issuing court orders as if he were a king.
- exe34 2y agoThe law does apply. Xitter is being sued, but Elon refuses to appoint a legal representative in the country. The judge has the right to ban the product until the owner or their representative shows up.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bubblesnort 2y agoThey can't. I can easily use a Brazil endpoint to establish a tunnel elsewhere and browse X, formerly Twitter. I suppose they could try fining the VPN service provider. (But even then they won't be able to prove what's going on.)
- nomdep 2y agoThe logical next step would be putting you under investigation for using a VPN “because only criminals need privacy”
- declan_roberts 2y agoGetting really close to that
- artificialprint 2y agoCan't you just ban public VPN services in the country? China has nailed it.
- Cyph0n 2y agoChina has nailed DPI-based techniques, and I am certain they’re exporting/selling the tech to other nations.
- declan_roberts 2y agoWhat if you're a public figure, maybe one critical of the government and you're still tweeting while in Brazil? Seems pretty easy to enforce to me regardless of the technical ways people circumvent it.
- btilly 2y agoIt would be amusing if the government tried to introduce that as evidence and then got countersued for having used X themselves. I know, I know. There is probably some exemption for law enforcement. Or if that was overlooked, there will be soon. But it was still an amusing thought.
- marcosdumay 2y agoThere's a lot to say about the Brazilian Supreme Court abuses of power. And to be complete on the context, I expect it to have teeth.
- laborcontract 2y agoIs it even remotely modeled after the US system of checks and balances? How does the court have what also seems like legislative power?
- marcosdumay 2y agoYes, it's modeled after the US Constitution. > How does the court have what also seems like legislative power? It doesn't. It just does it anyway. (Technically, it can dictate to courts how to interpret laws. On practice, it dictates things like "a person can only be arrested after a judge hosts a trial and orders it" as "a person can only be arrested after all judges host a trial". The power to interpret laws is extremely ambiguous.)
- stufffer 2y agoEven in the USA courts have some limited investigation powers over matters under the jurisdiction of the court, for example when a draft of the Dobbs abortion ruling was leaked. Brazil has dialed this up to 11 by declaring the Internet as being under their jurisdiction. That means they can act as judge, prosecutor, and jury and issue court orders regarding anything that happens on the Internet. There is zero recourse because they are the supreme court.
- schleck8 2y agoThe US is in no position to critique other countries' checks and balances right now with how the Supreme Court works
- ImPostingOnHN 2y agoWhat makes you think that? The US isn't a single person.
- IG_Semmelweiss 2y agoThey can't. A thorough explanation of the applicable law, point by point, that demonstrates that what you are saying is complete fantasy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39966382 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39966382 Why they could: The ruling socialist party is allowing the judge to go on a rampage because the ruling class has too many skeletons in their closet to mount an effective defense against the opposition. They hope they can just play dead during this mess - but if history is any guide, the judge will come after them later.
- outside1234 2y agoProbably not going to be enforced, but just the same sort of an own goal. Should have kept the focus on Elon Musk breaking the law.
- purple_ferret 2y agoWell we'll see how much teeth this fine based on how much Glenn Greenwald (who can't resist ranting on twitter) winds up owing. Ironic he abandoned the US citing its freedom laws only to wind up in this situation.
- mikrotikker 2y agoWell him and his husband were endlessly targeted at points of entry to the US as retaliation for Glens reporting on Snowden. So he's not wrong is he?
- hintymad 2y ago> Fining even users is a bit surprising Not really. Using VPN is illegal in China. The police can put you in jail for using VPNs. Of course, there are very few cases like this even though many people use underground VPNs. This is typical behavior of an authoritarian state: the government reserves the rights to punish you when the situation is right.
- 6nf 2y agoVPNs are not illegal in China. About a third of people in China use VPNs and the govt is fine with VPNs unless you're using it to break the law.
- hintymad 2y agoYou’re right, technically VPN is not illegal, as long as the operators abide laws. It is using VPN to get across GFW that is illegal: https://m.sohu.com/a/738815891_800907/?pvid=000115_3w_a#:~:text=%E7%BD%91%E7%BB%9C%E2%80%9C%E7%BF%BB%E5%A2%99%E2%80%9D%E8%BF%9D%E6%B3%95%E5%90%97,%E4%B8%8A%E7%BD%91%E8%A1%8C%E4%B8%BA%E6%9C%89%E6%98%8E%E7%A1%AE%E8%A7%84%E5%AE%9A%E3%80%82 https://m.sohu.com/a/738815891_800907/?pvid=000115_3w_a#:~:t... So, yeah, it is practically illegal to use VPN in China.
- 6nf 2y agoLet me guess, you've never been to China.