🇧🇷⚖️⁉️🖥 — During a discussion on internet freedom of expression, Supreme Court Justice Dias Toffoli made an embarrassing mistake, confusing domain registration with content, while believing he was making a valid point:

"Does the .br URL have a policy of prohibiting names? For example, sites like www. pedofilia .br, terrorismo .br, forademocracia .br? Is there a monitoring policy for such requests? If someone wants to register a page to commit pedophilia crimes, doesn't the .br URL have a way to prevent it?"

🇧🇷📱⚖️ — Facebook's attorney argues that removing content without a court order should be limited to specific crimes in Brazil.

📝 According to the attorney, exceptions to Article XIX of the Internet Civil Framework should be restricted to crimes such as Child Sexual Exploitation, Terrorism, Violent Abolition of the Rule of Law, and Coup d'État.

"This Court has an extensive jurisprudence rejecting censorship. Open-ended concepts like 'fake news,' 'disinformation,' and 'crimes against honor' would encourage excessive removals."

🇧🇷⚖️⁉️📱📱 — Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, during a hearing on the behavior of social media platforms in Brazil, claimed to be a victim of fake profiles on Instagram and Facebook and criticized the difficulty in getting them removed:

"I don’t have Instagram or Facebook, but there are about twenty profiles. I have to keep chasing after them, and it’s so obvious to the platform that the profile isn’t mine. Why is the profile ‘mine,’ but only criticizing me? It’s surreal."

🇧🇷⚖️⁉️📱 — After questioning Facebook's attorney, Supreme Court Justice Luís Roberto Barroso reassured him, stating that he was acting in good faith to clarify the facts and that it was not an interrogation. However, Justice Alexandre de Moraes remarked, "NOT YET."