Chennaitop10

ASIS_Ad-for-Chenani-Top-10

    Australian judge thinks it is absurd to demand X to hide video of church stabbing from all users.

    International News

    An Australian judge believes it would be unreasonable for the country’s internet safety agency to order social network X to hide video of a bishop being stabbed in a Sydney church from all of its global users.

    Melbourne, Australia — An Australian judge said it would be unreasonable for the country’s internet safety watchdog to require social media platform X to hide video of a bishop being stabbed in a Sydney church from all of its users worldwide, as he explained his decision to overturn a court order requiring X to do so.

    Justice Geoffrey Kennett of the Australian Federal Court issued his reasoning for the verdict on the video of the Assyrian Orthodox bishop’s stabbing on April 15.

    The firm, rebranded by billionaire Elon Musk after purchasing Twitter last year, was the only social media network to ignore Australia’s eSafety Commission’s removal request on April 26th, which compelled them to remove the footage of what Australian authorities have termed a terrorist incident.

    X geoblocked Australian X users, but eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, a former Twitter employee, requested that 65 URLs leading to the video be removed from the platform.

    Kennett regarded X’s claim that deleting the URLs was not a “reasonable” step as “powerful.” 

    He claimed that the move went against the international concept of the “comity of nations,” which recognises that countries’ laws have territorial borders.If given the breadth demanded by the commissioner, the removal order will control… the acts of a foreign corporation in the United States… and every country where its servers located. located,” wrote Kennett.

    “It would be a clear case of a national law professing to apply to people or issues over whom, according to the comity of nations, the jurisdiction rightfully belongs to some other sovereign or state,” Kennett said.

    Kennett stated that such an order would be “ignored or disparaged” by many governments.

    “This is not a reason why X Corp should not be held accountable, but it does show that an injunction is not a viable option, ” Kennett stated.

    On Wednesday, X will return to Federal Court for a pre-trial hearing to argue the validity of Iman Grant’s first removal notice. A trial date could be established for Wednesday.

    Lawyers have been waiting since Monday to hear Kennett’s reasons as they weigh their options, including a possible appeal to the full bench of the Federal Court.

    Australian government ministers have backed Iman Grant’s legal battle against X, hinting at the possibility of amending Australian laws if the courts rule against her.

    Her administration did not respond to the judge’s reasons immediately on Tuesday.

    Musk said on X following the verdict on Monday: “Not trying to win anything. I just don’t believe we should be repressing Australia’s freedom to free expression.”

    On Tuesday, X did not immediately react to a request for comment on the judge’s reasoning.

    Chennaitop10