Elon Musk's X calls French probe ‘a politically-motivated criminal investigation'; says won't cooperate
French probe
allegedly accusing it of data tampering. According to news agency Reuters, the company accused French prosecutors of launching a "politically-motivated criminal investigation" which, it claims, threatens its users' free speech. Denying all allegations against it, X said that it would not cooperate with the probe. Sharing a post via its Global Government Affairs account, X said 'Based on what we know so far, X believes that this investigation is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech'.
"For these reasons, X has not acceded to the French authorities' demands, as we have a legal right to do," the post added.
French lawmakers accuse X of "manipulating its algorithm'
French prosecutors opened a preliminary probe into the social media platform earlier this month. It was based on suspected algorithmic bias and fraudulent data extraction, reports Reuters. According to it, the probe authorized police to conduct searches, wiretaps and surveillance against Musk and X executives, or summon them to testify. If they do not comply, a judge could issue an arrest warrant.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
The probe could deepen a rift between Washington and European capitals over what sort of discourse is permitted online.
Here's what X said
French authorities have launched a politically-motivated criminal investigation into X over the alleged manipulation of its algorithm and alleged 'fraudulent data extraction.' X categorically denies these allegations.
This investigation, instigated by French politician Eric Bothorel, egregiously undermines X's fundamental right to due process and threatens our users' rights to privacy and free speech. Mr Bothorel has accused X of manipulating its algorithm for 'foreign interference' purposes, an allegation which is completely false.
French authorities have requested access to X's recommendation algorithm and real-time data about all user posts on the platform in order for several 'experts' to analyze the data and purportedly 'uncover the truth' about the operation of the X platform. One of those 'experts' is David Chavalarias, who spearheads the 'Escape X' campaign. Formerly known as 'HelloQuitteX', the campaign is dedicated to encouraging X users to leave the platform. A second 'expert,' Maziyar Panahi, has previously participated in research projects with David Chavalarias that demonstrate open hostility towards X.
The involvement of these individuals raises serious concerns about the impartiality, fairness, and political motivations of the investigation, to put it charitably. A predetermined outcome is not a fair one. What's more, French authorities have classified X as an 'organized gang' for the purpose of the investigation. This characterization, which is usually reserved for drug cartels or mafia groups, enables the French police to deploy extensive investigative powers under French law, including wiretapping the personal devices of X employees.
X remains in the dark as to the specific allegations made against the platform. However, based on what we know so far, X believes that this investigation is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech.
For these reasons, X has not acceded to the French authorities' demands, as we have a legal right to do. This is not a decision that X takes lightly. However, in this case, the facts speak for themselves.
X is committed to defending its fundamental rights, protecting user data and resisting political censorship.
Google Pixel 10 Series Launch: Everything Coming on August 20
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
a minute ago
- Mint
Why India may not stop buying Russian oil amid US tariff threat: Explained
In a major setback for India, US President Donald Trump announced Thursday a 25% tariff on the import of Indian goods and an additional "penalty" for buying the "vast majority of their military equipment from Russia." Trump said India is Russia's "largest buyer of ENERGY, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE — ALL THINGS NOT GOOD!". He also cited "massive trade deficit with India" as the reason behind the high tariff rate of 25%. He added that US has 'done very little business with India, their Tariffs are too high, among the highest in the World.' But a day later, the US President informed that tariff talks with India are still on, raising hope of a respite. "I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia. That's what I have heard. I don't know if that's right or not. That is a good step. We will see what happens...," he said on Thursday. There has been no official indication yet if India will stop buying oil from Russia. However, Indian government sources told Reuters on Saturday that India will keep purchasing oil from Russia, and there would be no immediate changes. Not giving in to Trump's pressure, these sources cited the following reasons for buying oil from Russia: 1. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight," they added. 2. Justifying India's oil purchases from Russia, a second source said India's imports of Russian grades had helped avoid a global surge in oil prices, which have remained subdued despite Western curbs on the Russian oil sector. 3. "Unlike Iranian and Venezuelan oil, Russian crude is not subject to direct sanctions, and India is buying it below the current price cap fixed by the European Union," the source said. 4. Meanwhile, sources told news agency ANI that India's energy decisions have been guided by national interest but have also contributed positively to global energy stability. "India's purchases have remained fully legitimate and within the framework of international norms,' they added. 5. These sources said, 'Had India not absorbed discounted Russian crude combined with OPEC production cuts of 5.86 mb/d, global oil prices could have surged well beyond the March 2022 peak of US$137/bbl, intensifying inflationary pressures worldwide.' 6. Meanwhile, Randhir Jaiswal, the official spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs, said on August 1 shed light on India's energy sourcing requirements. "You are aware of our broad approach that we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," he said. India is the second-largest importer of Russian oil after China. According to the New York Times, Russia is currently the source of more than one-third of India's oil imports, up from less than 1 percent before the war. The NITI Aayog's April-June (q1 FY2025) report revealed that in Q1 FY25, India recorded significant y-o-y import growth with Russia (19.69%). India imported about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil from January to June in 2025, up 1 percent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Meanwhile, Trading Economics cited the United Nations COMTRADE database on international trade as revealing that India's imports from Russia of crude oil was US$52.73 billion during 2024. In 2023, Russia was among the top trading partners of India. According to Trend Economy, Russia contributed 26% (58 billion US$) to India's imports (of "Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes). While India is among the top importers of Russia and China, the country is among the top exporters to the US. India remains a substantial exporter of refined petroleum products and other mineral fuels. "The primary destinations for these exports include the Netherlands, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States," Niti Aayog's report said. The USA is among the top importers of Indian goods, accounting for almost 33% of the total merchandise exports, according to NITI Aayog's report. It showed that the USA is India's top export destination in these categories: Minerals fuels & products, Natural or Cultured pearls, Electrical machinery & Equipment, Nuclear reactors, Pharmaceuticals products. NITI Aayog's April-June (q1 FY2025) report This contradicts Trump's 'little business with India' claim. The report also revealed that 'there is significant potential for Indian service exporters to expand their presence in major export markets such as the USA.' Tariffs are taxes imposed by a government (the US government in this case) on goods and services imported from other countries. They are simply an extra cost added to foreign products when they enter the country. Foreign goods get relatively more expensive, possibly driving up demand for domestic products. "Tariffs give a price advantage to locally produced goods over similar goods that are imported, and they raise revenues for governments," according to the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, some domestic industries may rely on imported materials and parts. In this case, the rise in prices of imported materials and parts would lead to face higher costs of production (by domestic producers). "If the domestic producers pass higher costs of production onto consumers, it will also push up prices of domestically produced goods," Oxford Economics explains. There's a possibility of lower export demand in the country (India) where the tariffs are imposed, since their goods have become relatively more expensive in the importing country (US).
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
a minute ago
- Business Standard
Exporters seek govt aid, credit at affordable rates to deal with US tariffs
Indian exporters from various sectors, including food, marine, and textiles, have sought financial assistance and affordable credit from the government to cope with the 25 per cent Trump tariff, industry officials said. In a meeting with Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal in Mumbai, certain exporters sought plans on the lines of the production-linked incentive (PLI) scheme, they added. "Exporters share issues, which they may face in the American market because of the high duty announced by US President Donald Trump," one of the officials said, adding that the minister has suggested that the exporting community send their suggestions in writing. They also demanded loans at affordable rates and fiscal incentives. In India, according to exporters, interest rates range between 8 and 12 per cent or even more, depending on the spread and risk assessment of the borrower by authorised dealer banks. In competing countries, the interest rate is very low. For instance, the central bank rate is 3.1 per cent in China, 3 per cent in Malaysia, 2 per cent in Thailand, and 4.5 per cent in Vietnam. The situation for sectors like apparel and shrimp is not good. US buyers have started cancelling orders or are holding back orders. In the coming months, it can impact India's exports to the US, and because of a dip in shipments, there could be job losses," they said, adding that it will be difficult for the government to extend fiscal incentives. The 25 per cent duty, announced this week, will come into force from August 7 (9.30 am IST). These will be over and above the existing standard import duty in the US. The sectors, which would bear the brunt of this high tax, include textiles/ clothing (10.3 billion), gems and jewellery (12 billion), shrimp (USD 2.24 billion), leather and footwear (USD 1.18 billion), chemicals (2.34 billion), and electrical and mechanical machinery (about USD 9 billion). The US accounts for over 30 per cent of India's leather and apparel exports. According to think tank GTRI, quick estimates suggest that India's goods exports in FY 2026 may come down by 30 per cent from USD 86.5 billion in the last fiscal to USD 60.6 billion in 2025-26. Sudhir Sekhri, Chairman, AEPC (Apparel Export Promotion Council), last week requested immediate government intervention to offset this huge setback. "Exporters have their back against the wall and will have to sell below cost to keep their factories running and avoid mass layoffs," he has said. Plastic exporter from Delhi NCR region Arvind Goenka said that exports to the US will face stiff competition from competing countries as tariffs on India are one of the highest. "The USA has fixed substantially lower tariffs on countries like Vietnam (20 per cent), Thailand (19 per cent) and South Korea (15 per cent), all of which excel in plastic goods production, and they may encroach into India's share, which currently is USD 2.2 billion annually," Goenka said. India's leading footwear exporter and Farida Group Chairman Rafeeq Ahmed said the government should come forward to help the industry before a trade pact is finalised between India and the US.
Time of India
a minute ago
- Time of India
Trump's America First biodiesel policy could cost US companies, consumers, trade groups warn
The Trump administration's push to discourage the use of foreign feedstocks in domestic biodiesel could lead to higher energy prices for US consumers and restricted domestic production, according to some refining and biofuel trade groups. The warning reflects ongoing friction between President Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency and the administration's traditional allies in the energy and agriculture industries over biofuels policy. Trump has promised to slash consumer energy costs, but is also trying to advance his America First agenda to support domestic production through trade protectionism - which can often make costs go up instead. At issue is a proposal from the EPA in June that would for the first time allocate only half as many tradable renewable fuel credits to biodiesel that is either imported or made with foreign feedstocks. Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners must blend large volumes of biofuels into the US fuel supply or purchase the credits, called RINs, from those that do. While meant to help domestic farmers and producers, the new proposal - set to be finalized this autumn - would place unprecedented demand on domestic raw materials needed to make biodiesel like soybean oil, used cooking oil, and animal fat, in a market that currently must look abroad to meet its needs. Meanwhile, restricting the number of RINs that can be generated through such imports will raise credit prices, with a potential spillover impact on diesel and home heating oil, according to the industry groups. "This credit restriction ... will jeopardize the economic viability of renewable fuel production assets and raise overall compliance costs for all obligated parties, which ultimately harms US consumers," Chet Thompson, head of the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers group representing refiners, said in a July 25 letter to top Republican lawmakers. The Advanced Biofuels Association also said the policy could mean ramped up consumer costs, by putting a $250 per metric ton premium on domestic versus imported feedstocks, according to a study it commissioned. "Economic analysis shows this would impose significant costs on US biorefineries, raise fuel prices for millions of Americans, and benefit only a narrow set of stakeholders," ABFA President Michael McAdams said in a statement. The White House and EPA declined to comment directly on the price concerns, saying the administration is still seeking public comment on the proposal until August 8. Others in the biofuel industry backed the proposal. "American farmers need all the demand they can get. We should be developing our capacity here, rather than relying on imported used cooking oil from China, or giving Brazilian feedstocks preferential treatment at the expense of US producers and their farm partners," said Emily Skor, CEO of Growth Energy. However, US companies such as ADM, Bunge and Cargill that have global assets and process US soy, as well as foreign companies with significant US operations, will likely see negative effects. That includes Australia's Nufarm , which contracts with farmers in South America to grow new oilseed crops. Uncertain numbers The biofuel industry had not been seeking the import shift in EPA's June proposal, according to multiple renewable fuel lobbyists and company officials. The White House has since held several meetings with industry officials to hear about potential unintended consequences of the changes, according to multiple sources. The EPA's proposal in June was meant to set out biofuel blending mandates for the next two years. It included a quota of 7.12 billion biomass-based diesel RINs for 2026 - a measurement of the number of tradable credits generated by blending the fuel - and projected that mandate would lead to the blending of 5.61 billion gallons. The biofuels industry and the American Petroleum Institute, an oil trade group, had banded together to lobby the administration to set biomass-based diesel mandates to at least 5.25 billion gallons. The mandate was just 3.35 billion gallons in 2025. Still, there are scenarios in the EPA's accounting that could lead to a lower volume outcome. If all the biodiesel and renewable diesel used in the US next year came from domestic feedstocks, for example, the RIN mandate would yield just 4.45 billion gallons, according to several industry analyses reviewed by Reuters. Ditching the penalty on imported feedstocks could help raise that number, according to the analyses. "That probably aligns with what the administration was trying to do in terms of supporting the agricultural side and farmers," said one industry analyst, who asked to remain anonymous to speak candidly.
