Business
From X to SpaceX: EU Regulators Could Fine Musk Companies For Free Speech Push
From Reclaim The Net
|
The EU and Brazil are sharpening their regulatory knives, and who better to test their shiny new powers on than Elon Musk, the guy who seems to have made annoying pro-censorship bureaucrats his full-time hobby? Musk’s social media platform, X has become the latest target for both the European Union and Brazil — but they’re not just going after X anymore. The powers-that-be have decided that since X isn’t worth much these days, maybe they should slap fines on Musk’s other companies—SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, and even the Boring Company—just because they can.
It’s the ultimate power move by regulators who seem to be more interested in flexing their muscles than addressing real issues. Why settle for a measly 6% fine on a struggling social media platform when you can drag in rockets, to pad the bill? The EU’s Latest Power Trip: Digital Services Act as a Blank Check Enter the Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU’s newest favorite tool for cracking down on “disinformation” and “hate speech” on major digital platforms. It’s got all the right buzzwords—”transparency,” “safety,” and “accountability”—but underneath the noble-sounding veneer, it’s starting to look more like a blank check for the EU to assert control over Big Tech. The law allows for fines of up to 6% of annual revenue for platforms that don’t comply. But when it comes to X, with its plummeting value—now at a measly $9.4 billion, according to Fidelity—the EU seems to be thinking, “Why stop at X when we can go after Musk’s entire empire?” Think about it: SpaceX, Neuralink, the Boring Company—what do they have to do with social media disinformation? Nothing, really. But the EU’s got a grudge, and they’re not about to let a little thing like fairness or logic get in their way. Musk’s decision to pull X out of the EU’s voluntary Code of Practice against disinformation in 2023 certainly didn’t help matters. Sure, he had initially played nice back in 2022, but when Musk realized that the EU’s idea of “voluntary” meant “you’ll comply, or else,” he bailed. Now, Brussels is retaliating by threatening to fine Musk’s companies that have nothing to do with social media, all while pretending this is about “protecting democracy.” If it sounds more like a personal vendetta than a reasoned policy decision, that’s because it probably is. Brazil Freezes Musk’s Assets: Free Speech or Free for All? Not to be outdone by their European counterparts, Brazil has decided to take its regulatory saber-rattling to new heights. The country’s highest court recently froze the assets of Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet venture, in an effort to squeeze a $3 million fine out of X for failing to censor content. That’s right—Brazil couldn’t get X to bend to their will, so they decided to take Musk’s satellites hostage. All in the name of combating “misinformation,” of course. What’s particularly galling about Brazil’s move is how blatantly it ignores the principles of free speech and open communication. The accusation that X “facilitated the spread of misinformation and hate speech” sounds noble on paper, but the way Brazil went about enforcing their demands—by freezing assets of an entirely separate company—looks more like strong-arm tactics than legitimate regulation. At this point, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that these governments are less concerned with disinformation and more interested in exerting control over tech companies that refuse to play by their increasingly arbitrary rules. Musk, who’s spent years promoting free speech as one of X’s core principles, is now facing a global game of whack-a-mole, with each country seemingly more eager than the last to punish him for refusing to fall in line. Personal Accountability or Public Power Play? One of the more interesting twists in the EU’s regulatory circus is the suggestion that they might hold Musk personally accountable under the DSA. Why? Because, according to the EU’s interpretation, “the entity exercising decisive influence” over a platform—whether that’s a company or an individual—can be on the hook for any wrongdoing. In other words, if Musk’s platform doesn’t comply, they’re coming for him directly. This is about using Musk as a punching bag to show the world that the EU is still in charge. Thomas Regnier, a spokesperson for the European Commission, helpfully clarified to Bloomberg, that the DSA’s rules apply “irrespective of whether the entity… is a natural or legal person,” which is bureaucrat-speak for, “We’re gunning for Elon.” |
|
|
|
Since you’re reading this, we hope you find Reclaim The Net useful. Today, we could use your help. We depend on supporters (averaging $15), but fewer than 0.2% of readers choose to give. If you donate just $5, (or the equivalent in your currency) you would help keep Reclaim The Net thriving for years. You don’t have to become a regular supporter; you can make a one-time donation. Please take a minute to keep Reclaim The Net going.
Thank you.
|
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
You’ve probably heard by now the blockbuster news that Microsoft founder Bill Gates, one of the richest people to ever walk the planet, has had a change of heart on climate change.
For several decades Gates poured billions of dollars into the climate industrial complex.
Some conservatives have sniffed that Bill Gates has shifted his position on climate change because he and Microsoft have invested heavily in energy intensive data centers.
AI and robotics will triple our electric power needs over the next 15 years. And you can’t get that from windmills.
What Bill Gates has done is courageous and praiseworthy. It’s not many people of his stature that will admit that they were wrong. Al Gore certainly hasn’t. My wife says I never do.
Although I’ve only once met Bill Gates, I’ve read his latest statements on global warming. He still endorses the need for communal action (which won’t work), but he has sensibly disassociated himself from the increasingly radical and economically destructive dictates from the green movement. For that, the left has tossed him out of their tent as a “traitor.”
I wish to highlight several critical insights that should be the starting point for constructive debate that every clear-minded thinker on either side of the issue should embrace.
(1) It’s time to put human welfare at the center of our climate policies. This includes improving agriculture and health in poor countries.
(2) Countries should be encouraged to grow their economies even if that means a reliance on fossil fuels like natural gas. Economic growth is essential to human progress.
(3) Although climate change will hurt poor people, for the vast majority of them it will not be the only or even the biggest threat to their lives and welfare. The biggest problems are poverty and disease.
I would add to these wise declarations two inconvenient truths: First: the solution to changing temperatures and weather patterns is technological progress. A far fewer percentage of people die of severe weather events today than 50 or 100 or 1,000 years ago.
Second, energy is the master resource and to deny people reliable and affordable energy is to keep them poor and vulnerable – and this is inhumane.
If Bill Gates were to start directing even a small fraction of his foundation funds to ensuring everyone on the planet has access to electric power and safe drinking water, it would do more for humanity than all of the hundreds of billions that governments and foundations have devoted to climate programs that have failed to change the globe’s temperature.
Stephen Moore is a co-founder of Unleash Prosperity and a former Trump senior economic advisor.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
At Tesla’s Austin headquarters, investors backed Musk’s 12-step plan that ties his potential trillion-dollar payout to a series of aggressive financial and operational milestones, including raising the company’s valuation from roughly $1.4 trillion to $8.5 trillion and selling one million humanoid robots within a decade. Musk hailed the outcome as a turning point for Tesla’s future.
“What we’re about to embark upon is not merely a new chapter of the future of Tesla but a whole new book,” Musk said, as The New York Times reported.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
The decision cements investor confidence in Musk’s “moonshot” management style and reinforces the belief that Tesla’s success depends heavily on its founder and his leadership.
Tesla Annual meeting starting now
https://t.co/j1KHf3k6ch— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 6, 2025
“Those who claim the plan is ‘too large’ ignore the scale of ambition that has historically defined Tesla’s trajectory,” the Florida State Board of Administration said in a securities filing describing why it voted for Mr. Musk’s pay plan. “A company that went from near bankruptcy to global leadership in E.V.s and clean energy under similar frameworks has earned the right to use incentive models that reward moonshot performance.”
Investors like Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood defended Tesla’s decision, saying the plan aligns shareholder rewards with company performance.
“I do not understand why investors are voting against Elon’s pay package when they and their clients would benefit enormously if he and his incredible team meet such high goals,” Wood wrote on X.
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, Norges Bank Investment Management — one of Tesla’s largest shareholders — broke ranks, however, and voted against the pay plan, saying that the package was excessive.
“While we appreciate the significant value created under Mr. Musk’s visionary role, we are concerned about the total size of the award, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk,” the firm said.
The vote comes months after Musk wrapped up his short-lived government role under President Donald Trump. In February, Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team sparked a firestorm when they announced plans to eliminate the U.S. Agency for International Development, drawing backlash from Democrats and prompting protests targeting Musk and his companies, including Tesla.
Back in May, Musk announced that his “scheduled time” leading DOGE had ended.
From Underdog to Top Broodmare
Public Execution of Anti-Cartel Mayor in Michoacán Prompts U.S. Offer to Intervene Against Cartels
Netanyahu orders deadly strikes on Gaza with over 100 dead despite ceasefire deal
Bank of Canada governor warns citizens to anticipate lower standard of living
Cloned foods are coming to a grocer near you
Canada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy
The era of Climate Change Alarmism is over
-
Justice2 days agoCarney government lets Supreme Court decision stand despite outrage over child porn ruling
-
Business2 days agoCarney’s budget spares tax status of Canadian churches, pro-life groups after backlash
-
COVID-192 days agoFreedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich to appeal her recent conviction
-
Daily Caller2 days agoUS Eating Canada’s Lunch While Liberals Stall – Trump Admin Announces Record-Shattering Energy Report
-
Daily Caller1 day agoUN Chief Rages Against Dying Of Climate Alarm Light
-
Energy2 days agoEby should put up, shut up, or pay up
-
Business2 days agoThe Liberal budget is a massive FAILURE: Former Liberal Cabinet Member Dan McTeague
-
Business1 day agoU.S. Supreme Court frosty on Trump’s tariff power as world watches