The Federal Court has ruled that X Corp must comply with Australia's Child Sexual Abuse Transparency Notice issued to the social media giant when it was still called Twitter.
After Company X challenged the $610,500 fine in September 2023, the Australian eSafety Commissioner took the matter to the Federal Court.
The fine was imposed because Company X failed to provide information about how it was meeting basic online safety expectations regarding child sexual exploitation and abuse content and activity on Twitter. The case arose from an infringement notice issued by the company.
However, Company X argued that the notice did not apply because the company did not exist at the time the notice was issued. This notice was issued on Twitter in February 2023 and X Corp was incorporated in March 2023.
During a 30-second hearing in Melbourne's Federal Court on Friday, Judge Michael Wheelahan dismissed the case and ordered Company X to pay eSafety's legal costs.
The court published its reasons online.
The case is separate from a court matter surrounding a video of a stabbing at a Sydney church.
X Corp challenged eSafety's takedown notice on the video, and the commission dropped the case in June.
X and eSafety are subject to several litigations in both the Federal Court and the Court of Administrative Appeals.
After Elon Musk acquired Twitter, Twitter merged with Company X.
In his ruling, Judge Wheelahan said online safety laws are an important part of federal law in a digital age where children are omnipresent on the internet.
The Online Safety Act notice was provided to Twitter 21 days before it merged with X and ceased to exist.
The notice required an explanation of how the company complied with specified applicable basic online safety expectations from January 2022 to January 2023.
The committee argued that the returned report lacked various answers and was incomplete or inaccurate.
“While data is unavailable or affected by other restrictions in some regions, Twitter remains committed to clarifying its approach and commitment to safety and services in a meaningful way for the Australian Commission and our users. We welcome any follow-up and engagement that may be helpful,” the executive replied. to the e-safety committee.
Follow-up questions were sent to the social media company, which responded that it wanted an extension and also said that Twitter “no longer exists as a legal entity.”
The committee granted two extensions.
AP
Company X's ongoing response referred to the attached “final submission from Company X (Twitter's successor).”
But a month later, eSafety issued an infringement notice. Itemized fines totaling $610,500 for various violations of the Online Safety Act.
In making his decision, Judge Wheelahan evaluated the structure of the laws of Delaware, where Twitter is incorporated, and Nevada, where X is registered.
He also found that Company X had violated the reporting deadline terms of the original notice.
Second, the court found that the eSafety Infringement Notice failed to specify the “location” where the infringement occurred.
Company X argued that the notice was invalid, but Judge Wheelahan stated that the error “must be recognized as the result of a process of statutory interpretation” and held the notice against Company X in terms of “location.” handed down a judgment.
