Technology

59374 readers

3846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

529

X fails to avoid Australia child safety fine by arguing Twitter doesn’t exist (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Wheelahan found that under Nevada law, merging Twitter into X turned Twitter into a "constituent entity," which then transferred all of Twitter's legal consequences to X Corp.

Isn't that how it works everywhere? What where they even arguing for?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Like, if that worked, wouldn't every company just sell itself to a new shell company once a year and drop every kind of legal liability?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Pharmaceutical businesses enter the chat

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Elmo was really hoping he found a SovCit level loophole to just escape all consequences.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Which is weird, because SovCits are a cargo cult who try to mimic the legal miracles top lawyers sometimes manage to pull off. Musk should be different - he does have access to these top lawyers who do have deep understanding of the law.

Unless Twittex' lawyers got the same treatment the engineers got?