Australian eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has decided to drop her Federal Court complaint against social media company X Corp. and pursue her Administrative Appeals Tribunal case. 

Several elements affected Inman Grant's decision, according to AP News. The cost of withdrawal is a major factor. Inman Grant said concentrating her commission's legal action against X in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal would be more efficient and cost-effective than litigating individual battles. This permits her to focus on the tribunal case, which she expects to take longer.

Australia's Next Move

Grant also wanted an impartial merits analysis of the case's major problems. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal ensures a comprehensive review. Australia's e-safety commissioner feels this approach will provide a more complete case analysis and ramifications.

Inman Grant also said that her legal action against X had resulted in internet assaults on her and her family, including doxxing. These insults, together with threats and harassment, undoubtedly impacted her action to move the judicial procedures.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland supported eSafety Commissioner Inman Grant's decision to abandon the Federal Court lawsuit and proceed in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Rowland stressed the government's support of regulators and feared for Inman Grant and her family.

X Corp. refused eSafety's order to remove a video of a Sydney bishop's stabbing. The platform formerly known as Twitter only geoblocked the video for Australian users, unlike Meta, Microsoft, Google, Snap, TikTok, Reddit, and Telegram. The Federal Court lawsuit began when the eSafety Commission sought a global video-sharing ban.

X's reluctance to reveal its measures to combat child sexual abuse material is one reason Inman Grant is continuing legal action before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. This judicial struggle shows the eSafety Commission's commitment to online safety and well-being in Australia.

After Inman Grant's decision, Elon Musk said, "Freedom of speech is worth fighting for." However, Inman Grant accused Musk of instigating online assaults against her and her family due to his position and authority.

As judicial proceedings continue, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal case will shed light on online safety, free expression, and social media providers' obligations in Australia.

Read Also: Google Provides $1 Million Grant to Establish the San Diego Cyber Clinic

A Look Back at Australia-X Conflict

TechTimes previously reported that Elon Musk, CEO of X, strongly opposed the court decision to delete evidence from a Sydney terrorist event. The tech mogul warned that this ruling could give any country internet control.

Australia's Federal Court ordered X to erase footage of the attack made by a 16-year old boy, who faced terrorism charges for assaulting a bishop during a sermon. After X blocked access to these posts for Australian users, the e-Safety Commissioner of Australia demanded their removal owing to the graphic violence.

Elon Musk warned against giving any nation internet control and raised concerns about the Australian government's control over global web content on social media.

The controversial tech figure posted a joke on X after its acquisition in 2022, branding it a symbol of "free speech and truth" as opposed to "censorship and propaganda."

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese previously remarked that Musk thinks he's above the law and lacks decency. Albanese was surprised by X's defiance of the court order and their argument.

Related Article: OpenAI CEO Invests Big: Report Reveals Sam Altman's $2.8 Billion Portfolio in 400+ Tech Startups