- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
Elon Musk merging Twitter into X didn’t absolve X from child safety fine.
Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) remains on the hook for an approximately $400,000 fine after failing to respond to an Australia eSafety Commission 2023 inquiry, which largely sought to probe measures X is currently taking to combat an alleged proliferation of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on its platform.
To void the fine, X tried to persuade Australian Judge Michael Wheelahan that X had no obligation to comply with an Online Safety Act notice issued to Twitter because Twitter “ceased to exist” a few weeks after receiving the notice—when Musk merged the app into his company X Corp.
You must log in or register to comment.
I would 100x the fucking fine just for trying that argument if I was the judge.
I’m not sure about Australia’s laws, but in the US, that could result in recusal of the judge on the grounds of bias.
that’s not really a problem if the judge simply changes their name
It’s like the game you play with a baby where you put your hands over your face to hide.
I wish companies and people were held to the standards of their own arguments.
For example because X claimed they don’t owe anything because they changed their name from Twitter, any business dealing with X would legally be allowed to use the same argument.
I hope the judge chuckles for a moment then triples what he owes.
The fine was not written in red ink diagonally across the postage stamp. No countsy.
-Elon Musk
Omw to max out credit cards and then change my name
Brilliant!
lol he really went for the sovcit strats. fucking idiot.
does this mean the twitter brand is up for grabs? anyone can start up a new website at twitter dot com? musk’s letting go of it completely?
So i committed a crime, i didn’t know if i change my name i could get out of it
I’m not sure why the famed Family Circus defense didn’t work…
I don’t get it? I searched defense on that page and got nothing.
Is it about being absurd?Were you really under the impression that I was serious about it being a famed legal defense? Read the “Gremlins” section I linked to.
No I absolutely expected it to be sarcasm.
I read the part, and that’s quite funny and fitting.
I’m thinking Musk may be in a “Brewster’s Millions” situation, in which he needs to spend every penny he has and end up with absolutely no assets in order to win an even larger fortune.
If we’re really, really lucky, someone scammed him to think that he’d win a fortune, and after he’s lost everything he’ll discover there’s no fortune.
Ars Technica - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Ars Technica:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
