> ban Twitter

Yes. Twitter is a lot less essential than you might think.

Everything is. The balance between stay and remain within EU is not especially weighted towards remain in an increasing number of countries. The EU deciding to take any sort of a meaningful stance against free speech or free expression is, IMO, much more likely to push those still in the middle more towards leaving the EU than it is to push them towards remaining.

It's an irrelevant act on its own weight, but there always comes a straw that breaks the camel's back. Now is just such an absurdly horrible time to do something that might agitate.

So, banning twitter will directly lead to other countries leaving the EU because twitter is the only way of free speech that exists?

One can only hope!

They did not ban Telegram, so why should they ban Twitter?

Because Telegram complies with demands from law enforcement, despite what they want you to believe.

"ban" twitter how? go to china and ask to license the great firewall? you could restrict it from operating a EU office or servers, you could restrict it from taking payment in euros, you could even restrict EU domiciled business from paying it but actually "banning" it is a much more authoritarian option.

Why should Twitter pay for infastructure for users that don't generate any revenue? That sounds like bad business.

who says you can't still advertise to them? if twitter goes the "screw the eu" route they don't even have to follow gdpr so that makes for a competitive advantage.

If Twitter doesn't comply the EU can make it virtually impossible for their citizens and businesses to buy ads. Journalists who choose to be lazy will face zero interruption.

> What will they do if Twitter doesn't comply, ban Twitter?

No, they'll fine them.

The only way to force fine payment is to threaten with a ban otherwise. If Twitter doesn't pay the fine, what does the EU do?

Sue them? The EU has a number of court systems. And in quite a lot of circumstances EU judgements are enforceable in the US. https://iclg.com/practice-areas/enforcement-of-foreign-judgm...

I believe in France the fine is felt and companies like Twitter comply with the rules. Whereas in the U.S. a fine is expensed as part of the cost of doing business and rules are broken repeatedly. Worse case is a long battle in the courts and after more than a decade they settle out of court for a little money and noone is held responsible.

Seize any assets within the EU. Likely get into 'contempt of court' situation - which might prevent any executives travel to any EU country. To my knowledge there is on such precedent so far, though.

Can you name that precedent? Would be interesting to know

cant type: on = no

Is there a precedent for it not happening, i.e. a company being court-ordered to pay a fine and just deciding not to pay it without consequences?

Go after executives? Or, assuming Twitter will be private one day, after the owner(s)? Freeze assets? Go through the WTO and US authorities?

i doubt America would back that since at that point twitter is doing nothing illegal here. just refusing to block eu citizens. similar to how extradition generally requires something being a crime in both countries.

Not blocking certain users in a jurisdiction where these blocks are required by law is, by definition, illegal. Obviously, some countries have more power to enforce those things than others. Also obviously, the EU is among the front runners of power to be able to enforce those things. And I am fairly sure the US won't start a trade war over Twitter the way the EU and the US did over Airbus and Boeing.

no it's not, because the internet doesn't require you to be present in some place so you are not subject to that jurisdiction. i do not recognize the jurisdiction of a country to demand a block of its citizens from a company located in an entirely different nation, and i doubt American courts would either.

like imagine i host a human rights site. if iran says it is illegal for me to provide access to content supporting womens rights to iranian citizens, it is not "illegal" for me to continue doing so because i am American, i live in America, and i operate only by American laws. America would not extradite me to iran for failing to comply with their internet rules.

Fair enough, unless you choose to operate in, e.g., Iran. Now you have options:

1) follow Iranian law

2a) not follow Iranian law and be blocked

2c) not follow Iranian law, circumvent any blocking and be prosecuted

2c obviously wont matter much in the case of Iran, in other cases it might. And while the US wont extradite you, other countries might. And there is still the option of abusing Interpol and red notices, again maybe not a problem in case of Iran and US internet co executives.

You know who thought the same way you do? German citizen living in NZ Kim Dotcom. You know who disagreed? The US DoJ. Would be about time if other countries would do the same to certain US entities, wouldn't it?

See : the spying allegation issues by the US against a French CEO of Alstom. He went straight to jail.

It’s fairly commonly recognized it’s was a ploy to force the sell of Alstom to GE, as opposed to a Chinese joint venture

No; that was the US does. See Alstom French CEO jailed in the US because he wanted to sell to Chinese and not GE.

They could go the US route and threaten kidnapping and/or assassination of the CEO.

You are referring to Alstom guy right ? Straight up kidnapping indeed.

Frédéric Pierucci. There's also that Huawei woman...Meng Wanzhou?

What is right for the US must be right for the EU, right?

Fine them more ? No but seriously, legal consequence are not always backed by a army threat.

Twitter want to be in good standing in regard to the laws.

Why would they bother pay taxes at all anywhere otherwise ?

Didn’t Musk volunteer to follow the laws of the countries twitter runs in, in fact he said that it was a good thing to follow those laws because it reflects the will of the people.

might do journalists a lot of good

German press cheered when the German government enacted the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz ("Network enforcement law") a few years ago which forced Social Networks, regardless of their origin, to block and/or delete things that could be considered illegal within 60 minutes.

In fact, the law was so well-designed that Iran, Russia and China quickly copied it.

Everyone always forgets that if you create a sharp sword, it still can be wielded against yourself. Abuse of censorship infrastructure is only one autocrat away.

The naïveté is astounding, no?

To be fair, Russia and China have always been able to do anything that they want. If they can't find a law that fits, they'll create a conviction for another another. In practical terms, that probably didn't cost their citizens any freedom. Restrictions like that end up having more negative effects on the other nations with real civil liberties.

I recall the same thing being said about Apple and USB-C ports in iPhones, yet here we are.