undefined | Better HN

0 pointsNatsu1y ago0 comments

Moraes' order claimed they were part of an "economic group" due to Musk's ownership. That's pretty much it.

Since then, Starlink has just said that everyone can have free service for now since they can't get paid anyway. They're in use in a lot of remote areas, like Amazonia, and the Brazilian military came out with a statement the other day saying that they rely on Starlink and if Moraes wants to shut that down, it will screw them over.

0 comments

diegoholiveira1y ago

> Moraes' order claimed they were part of an "economic group" due to Musk's ownership.

The problem is that this is not true, the two companies are not part of the same economic group. They are two completely different organizations and even if they were, this type of decision is only made when there is fraud of the type: you owe the government and it is known that you are the owner of a company despite there being no legal connection (i.e., it is in the name of third parties).

It is an absurd decision that shows the world how unsafe it is to invest in Brazil.

NatsuOP1y ago

Yeah, I won't defend this decision, it's an unaccountable decision made by a single man who has decided that he personally has the right to decide what people can and cannot say.

I've heard some defend it as "well, that's just how the law is in Brazil" but the same defense could be given for any dictatorship and it's rather telling that even those who advance this as a defense do not even attempt to give an account for why a single person playing judge, jury & executioner is a good way for this to be done.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse