Let's talk about Musk saying Starlink is going to defy #Brazilian law.
-
Michael Gemarreplied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration Musk is a horrific human, but I don’t think the US government should be ensuring that US companies confirm to foreign business laws.
-
@mastodonmigration
The drama is getting better and better -
Pamela :yell:replied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration
Interesting development. I am not an expert in trade agreements between the US and Brazil. I don't know if the power struggle between Musk and Brazil is even on the US' radar.But multi-billion dollar, multi-national, for-profit mega-corporate entities have been operating without consistent international regulation for some time.
They operate in an extra-legal, pseudo-governmental, for-profit environment of their own creation--much to the detriment of civil society.
-
Mastodon Migrationreplied to Michael Gemar last edited by
You have it wrong. Not saying the US should police foreign government's laws, but the US Government itself should not unwittingly be drawn into such illegal activities. Low Earth Orbit, in this case, is licensed and regulated by the US Government and is being used to violate Brazilian law without authority granted by the US to do so with this public resource. This make the US responsible for curtailing this illegal action. It becomes a matter of international relations.
-
Michael Gemarreplied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration I don’t understand — if North Korea decreed that it was illegal for Starlink to pass over their country, should the US enforce that?
-
Mastodon Migrationreplied to Pamela :yell: last edited by
Right, but see other response in this thread. The difference here is that Musk is using a public resource, LEO, licensed by the USG to break Brazilian law. This brings the USG in.
-
Mastodon Migrationreplied to Michael Gemar last edited by
It would become a matter for international relations. Starlink should seek and be given authority to use LEO in this manner. The point is, SpaceX is licensed to use a public resource. The public, that is the USG, therefore becomes a partner in whatever actions SpaceX takes with this resource. A counter example would be Starlink providing targeting services to the Russians.
-
Pamela :yell:replied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration
I understand that. I, personally, am making no predictions or demands at this time.I'm suggesting he isn't complying because he is operating a multi-billion dollar, multi-national, for-profit mega-corporate entity that lacks consistent international regulation.
Whether or not and how the US gets involved in the dispute remains to be seen.
At any rate. I'm going to move on now and let y'all hash it out.
-
Mastodon Migrationreplied to Pamela :yell: last edited by
Fair enough. Not saying the USG will get involved. Just trying to frame the issue, and point out that LEO is involved. Thanks for commenting.
-
BashStKidreplied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration Sounds like a Mexican standoff between the USG, the FCC, and the Outer Space Treaty as to who has to spank Elon.
-
Americanist4Ureplied to Mastodon Migration last edited by
@mastodonmigration
Correct, that space needs to be shared with the rest of the world. -
Mastodon Migrationreplied to Americanist4U last edited by [email protected]
It really is remarkable that such a public resource is being claimed by one company and used to illegally assert a destabilizing political campaign on a nation of 200 million people. What's next, corporate space lazers?