An Australian judge has extended a ban on X hosting videos of the stabbing of a Sydney bishop, which occurred during an Assyrian Orthodox service. X, the social media company owned by Elon Musk, has been fighting against a notice from Australia’s eSafety Commission to remove the video of the attack. The judge’s order has been in place since April 22, and the decision on its continuation will be made on Monday. X has geoblocked Australian users from the content, but the video can still be accessed through Virtual Private Networks. The regulator is pushing for a worldwide ban on the video, which it believes is necessary due to the violent and extremist nature of the footage.
The attack on the bishop in Sydney led to terrorism-related charges for the teenage perpetrator and sparked a riot outside the church. Musk has accused Australia of censorship and has applied to the Federal Court to overturn the eSafety notice. X’s argument centers around the concept of free speech, with its lawyer asserting that the demand for a global ban on the video is unreasonable and invalid. The court is set to consider setting a hearing date for X’s application on Wednesday. The eSafety Commission has criticized X for its stance on free speech and its policies regarding the removal of content globally.
An eSafety lawyer described X as a “market leader in proliferating and distributing violent content and violent and extremist material.” The lawyer argued that X’s pro-free speech stance is illusory, as the platform removes content globally under certain circumstances. X’s lawyer, on the other hand, defended the company’s actions and claimed that the notice for a global ban was astonishing. The lawyer also argued against the idea of Australia regulating what content can be viewed in other countries, suggesting that this level of isolationism would be unthinkable. The ongoing legal battle between X and the Australian government highlights the ongoing tensions surrounding online content moderation and free speech.
The bishop and a priest were injured during the attack, but both survived. The incident has raised concerns about the spread of violent and extremist content online, with the eSafety Commission calling for stronger measures to prevent the circulation of such material. X’s decision to fight against the ban on the video has brought attention to the company’s policies and practices in dealing with violent content. The court’s decision on whether to uphold the ban on hosting the video of the attack will have significant implications for online platforms and their responsibilities in moderating harmful content.
The case raises questions about the boundaries of free speech and the responsibilities of online platforms in preventing the dissemination of violent and extremist content. X’s refusal to comply with the eSafety notice reflects the ongoing debate about the regulation of online platforms and the balance between free speech and public safety. The court’s decision on whether to extend the ban on hosting the video of the bishop’s stabbing will be closely watched by stakeholders in the online content moderation space. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the regulation of online content and the protection of individuals from harmful material.
