X isn't a subsidiary of Starlink (or vice versa) so I genuinely don't understand the 'common control' argument you're making. Then again I'm not a corporate lawyer so what do I know.
It would be like Clayton Homes becoming legally liable for Fruit of the Loom because both are owned by by Berkshire Hathaway. It makes no sense.
> X isn't a subsidiary of Starlink (or vice versa) so I genuinely don't understand the 'common control' argument
“A ‘controlling financial interest’ is generally defined as ownership of a majority voting interest by one entity, directly or indirectly, of more than 50% of the outstanding voting shares of another entity” [1]. When a person has a controlling financial interest in multiple entities, those entities are under common control. The textbook example is “an individual or enterprise holds more than 50% of the voting ownership interest of each entity” [2].
Musk controls SpaceX [3], which in turn controls Starlink. Musk controls X. X and Starlink are under common control.
Whether that means Starlink is liable for X’s liabilities is a separate question. But it’s precedented in practically every jurisdiction for there to be a point at which entities under common control are jointly liable, at least to the degree to which they’re commonly controlled. (SpaceX’s non-controlling interests may have a separate claim on Musk.)
Side note: the comment I’m responding to doesn’t deserve to be downvoted.
Not a lawyer. But X blew off a court. That’s wilful contempt.
Under U.S. civil securities law, Warren Buffett ordering Clayton Homes to break the law could lead to control person liability [1]. If there were no way to hold Clayton Homes, Berkshire Hathaway or Warren Buffett personally liable, the next step would be enforcement against Fruit of the Loom.
Contempt of court is incredibly serious. Contempt pierces the corporate veil under U.S. law [2]. X acted in blatant contempt of Brazil’s courts. Musk publicly admitted to directing it to. There isn’t a competent jurisdiction, almost to the point of defining competence, in which this wouldn’t pierce the corporate veil.
Note that the judge (de Moraes), not the op, has made this argument, and it is certainly being treated as contentious. In the general case, the judge would need to show that he thought the corporate veil had been pierced here, but who knows what Brazilian law says, or what the Supreme Court will rule.
That's funny. This is an unelected supreme court judge-god-king who is being actively protested for unconstitutional censorship, and he laughs at the people protesting him.
It doesn't matter what brazilian law says. He does what he wants. You don't get to appeal because there's no court above him. Even if you somehow appeal anyway, he judges the appeals to his own judgements. I've seen news of him handling accusations against himself.
If I were the US I'd sanction Brazil for illegally stealing millions from US companies via completely arbitrary and illegal "fines". US Trade Representative already sanctions us over the copyright infringement situation, and this is much worse. There's basically no limit to how many dollars this guy can steal from the american economy if the US doesn't put a stop to him. It's not even the first time, and Twitter is not the only victim. Google tried to campaign against the "fake news" laws by committing the grave crime of putting up a link on their web page. He slapped them with an arbitrary hourly fine too until the link was gone. "Abuse of economic power and market position", they called it.
USA is already making some moves. I saw some US politicians call for the cancellation of the passports of these judges, denying them entry to the USA. Today I saw news of one judge's reaction to that: basically threw a temper tantrum and called the actions of the US politicians "unacceptable" as if there was anything he could do about it. Hilarious. I can only hope it escalates further and that it leads to their downfall.
It would be like Clayton Homes becoming legally liable for Fruit of the Loom because both are owned by by Berkshire Hathaway. It makes no sense.