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.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4193788-musk-acknowledges-he-turned-off-starlink-internet-access-last-year-during-ukraine-attack-on-russia-military/

"That is exactly what happened"

Except for the part where Musk himself admitted it wasn't so.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1699917639043404146?s=46&t=bZcrLpl8DTxSpYLBntBfhQ

It never operated in Crimea, but there's a huge difference between "We can't do it even if you ask us." and "We won't do it even if you ask us." In that case it's the second option.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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@lemm.ee 0 points 10 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.