5 ms·

The while thing about fining people for using a VPN was rescinded almost immediately, per this NYT article [1] but the press is still running with it everywhere

by pogue 2y ago

The while thing about fining people for using a VPN was rescinded almost immediately, per this NYT article [1] but the press is still running with it everywhere it seems.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." [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/30/world/americas/brazil-elon-musk-x-blocked.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/30/world/americas/brazil-elo...

TiredOfLife 2y ago
From the same article: "He did not cut language saying that people who use VPN apps to access X in Brazil could face fines."
- squigz 2y ago
  Full text: > A correction was made on Aug. 30, 2024 > 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.
hu3 2y ago
It was not fully rescinded.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. [1] https://www.riotimesonline.com/moraes-revises-vpn-ban-as-brazil-debates-digital-rights-amid-legal-battle-with-musk/ https://www.riotimesonline.com/moraes-revises-vpn-ban-as-bra...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lelandfe 2y ago
You appear to have shared an old quote the NYT later rescinded. That last sentence no longer appears on your link.
xinayder 2y ago
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. EDIT: "Moraes backtracks and suspends ban on downloading VPN applications": https://valor.globo.com/politica/noticia/2024/08/30/moraes-volta-atras-e-suspende-proibicao-a-download-de-aplicativos-de-vpn.ghtml https://valor.globo.com/politica/noticia/2024/08/30/moraes-v... 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.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
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 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.
- xinayder 2y ago
  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". If you want to watch it, here's the link (starts at 2:00 mark): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhzsRNw0RNU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhzsRNw0RNU EDIT: 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. https://www.cgi.br/pagina/marco-civil-law-of-the-internet-in-brazil/180 https://www.cgi.br/pagina/marco-civil-law-of-the-internet-in...

by pogue 2y ago

TiredOfLife 2y ago

From the same article: "He did not cut language saying that people who use VPN apps to access X in Brazil could face fines."

squigz 2y ago
Full text: > A correction was made on Aug. 30, 2024 > 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.

hu3 2y ago

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. [1] https://www.riotimesonline.com/moraes-revises-vpn-ban-as-brazil-debates-digital-rights-amid-legal-battle-with-musk/ https://www.riotimesonline.com/moraes-revises-vpn-ban-as-bra...

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

lelandfe 2y ago

You appear to have shared an old quote the NYT later rescinded. That last sentence no longer appears on your link.

xinayder 2y ago

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. EDIT: "Moraes backtracks and suspends ban on downloading VPN applications": https://valor.globo.com/politica/noticia/2024/08/30/moraes-volta-atras-e-suspende-proibicao-a-download-de-aplicativos-de-vpn.ghtml https://valor.globo.com/politica/noticia/2024/08/30/moraes-v... 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.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

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 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.

xinayder 2y ago
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". If you want to watch it, here's the link (starts at 2:00 mark): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhzsRNw0RNU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhzsRNw0RNU EDIT: 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. https://www.cgi.br/pagina/marco-civil-law-of-the-internet-in-brazil/180 https://www.cgi.br/pagina/marco-civil-law-of-the-internet-in...