Brazil to Fine Anyone Using a VPN to Access X $8,874 per Day; Elon Musk Responds
complex.com
complex.com
"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-elo...
"He did not cut language saying that people who use VPN apps to access X in Brazil could face fines."
> 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.
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-bra...
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-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.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 Even if that VPN order is rescinded, Brazil’s business reputation is now damaged.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.
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
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...Sure, there is a problematic aspect of this particular court and judge in Brazil.
But Elon purposefully went beyond non-compliance to get Twitter banned on purpose to amplify his point of view. He closed up the Brazil office that was required to operate in the country.
And before you say that Elon is doing this to fight for free speech, explain how being a “free speech absolutist” jives with his business presence in China, or his own suspension of left-leaning and Musk-critical accounts.
He said they froze the bank accounts of representatives and he is closing down the offices to protect those people so they wouldn't be retaliated against. If this is the case, would you agree with it being the reasonable choice of action?
Uhm how will they actually know? That's the whole point of public VPN.
It’s like seatbelt laws or driving without a license, some offenses exist which are usually identified only because some other potential offense else drew attention.
2 - Use some Court order to inform which Brazilians accounts made login during that time
3 - Give time to that users so they prove that whey were outside Brazil during the time
4 - Failing that, there's an assumption that the Brazilian user acessed the X while it was blocked and used some technology to circumvent it
Not that hard. Indeed, very simple, and many users that are trying VPNs right now don't have this tech knowledge to consider the long-term effects of theis actions.
Can ISPs really find this out? Of course if Oops betray users -another win for Musk & Starlink- but short of that?
Is tapping into ISP connections to known VPN IP addresses the only way?
(How the PD is supposed to be checking their Twitter account amid the blockade, I don’t know.)
Personally I'm on social media to talk to my friends. If they block just 1/3rd of my friends, when there's a different non-blocked service my group of friends will move to it. A sort of reverse network effect.
The ban and fine will deter advertisers, anyone making traceable payments, people using their real name, anyone operating a business presence, and anyone straight-laced who believes in following the law. Thanks to this fine, nobody's going to be in a hurry to encourage their friends to get a VPN. And thanks to app stores the state can also get the apps yanked from almost all phones. That's more than enough to trigger the reverse network effect.
The aim here is to either get Twitter to the negotiating table, or to punish them. That's accomplished by blocking 90% of users, the last 10% really won't make a difference either way.
What if people that normally use a VPN or a remote job corporate VPN in another country accidently click or get redirected to a Twitter link? Twitter links are all over the web.
List of countries where its illegal to access X: Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela, Brazil and Turkmenistan
But it's also fact that this particular judge is arbitrarily punishing the entire country by applying such charges.