X won a legal challenge against the Australian eSafety Commissioner, who requested the removal of a post criticizing a World Health Organization expert on transgender issues. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal determined that the post did not constitute cyber abuse. The tribunal found the user's expression lacked malicious intent and was part of a broader public debate. Previously, the eSafety Commissioner had also sought to remove video of a violent incident due to concerns about community unrest.
In a victory for free speech, X has won its legal challenge against the Australian eSafety Commissioner's demand to censor a user's post about gender ideology. The post is part of a broader political discussion involving issues of public interest that are subject to legitimate debate.
The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views [the user] has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent. When the evidence is considered as a whole, I am not satisfied that an ordinary reasonable person would conclude that by making the post [the user] intended to cause [the subject] serious harm.
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal ruled that the post in question did not meet the definition of cyber abuse, as initially suggested by the eSafety Commissioner.
Also last year, the Australian eSafety Commissioner requested that X remove video footage of a stabbing incident in a Sydney church, due to concerns that it could spark further angst and unrest in the community.
Collection
[
|
...
]