• TWeaK
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -1311 months ago

    That is exactly what happened. The US prohibits US companies (including SpaceX) from operating in Crimea. Nothing was switched off, the attack vessel simply left the area it works in, and they couldn’t switch it back on either.

    Furthermore, SpaceX are not authorised to sell weapons or participate in military actions with foreign forces. They’re already on shaky legal grounds by turning the other way to Ukraine’s use (which the US supports, of course, so they’re generally willing to let it slide). If SpaceX started operating in Crimea and actively supporting the war effort, that would open them up to liability.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        If you view the comments above you’ll see that your quote was from a biography, Musk has always denied this, and since then the author of the biography has said he got it wrong.

        Starlink has never operated in Crimea.

          • TWeaK
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 months ago

            I’m sure they technically could, but legally they can’t.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              011 months ago

              And they would have gotten sued by the government that was providing the weapons used to blow up Russian targets?

              Musk got himself involved in the war and got in the way of his country’s ally, he should be in jail and his company should have been seized.

              • TWeaK
                link
                fedilink
                English
                011 months ago

                Probably not sued, no. The government doesn’t need to sue a business to reprimand it for breaking the law.

                Musk got himself involved in the war and got in the way of his country’s ally, he should be in jail and his company should have been seized.

                It’s pretty clear you don’t even have a basic understanding of how the law works. And you’ve moved back to “got in the way”, as if he actively blocked something specifically to prevent Ukraine’s attack.

                The service never worked there and he wasn’t allowed to turn it on. That’s all there is to it, regardless of how angrily you tap on your keyboard.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  111 months ago

                  If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.

                  Yes, he actively blocked something specifically to prevent Ukraine’s attack.

                  • TWeaK
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    011 months ago

                    The request he referred to was turning it on. The US had already told him not to operate in that area. He didn’t block it to prevent the attack, it was already blocked because the US told him he had to.