Original post: https://bsky.app/profile/ssg.dev/post/3lmuz3nr62k26
Email from Bluesky in the screenshot:
Hi there,
We are writing to inform you that we have received a formal request from a legal authority in Turkey regarding the removal of your account associated with the following handle (@carekavga.bsky.social) on Bluesky.
The legal authority has claimed that this content violates local laws in Turkey. As a result, we are required to review the request in accordance with local regulations and Bluesky’s policies.
Following a thorough review, we have determined that the content in question violates local laws in Turkey, as outlined in the legal request. In compliance with these legal provisions, we have restricted access to your account for users.
The relevant question here is if you are in Turkey because if you aren’t this is a much bigger deal than if you are.
Also, does “restricted access to your account for users” mean for all users or just for those in Turkey?
Even if it’s a Turkey-specific restriction for users based in the country, it nonetheless shows that Bluesky is willing to comply with government requests.
Do they have the choice?
Always, if they can deal with the consequences. But if the consequence is being blocked by a country they could make money from, chances are slim.
Let’s imagine BlueSky is absolutely decentralized and does not need to make money, would it have done the same? The answer is unfortunately yes. The other option is to get completely blocked in the country, which after all, does not help.
I’m in favor of decentralization but let’s not pretend that dealing with authorities is not a problem for decentralized services.
it’s an entirely different problem because decentralization implies there is no “BlueSky” that could “do the same” as the power to comply is not theirs alone anymore at that point.
The account is still up and viewable for me. US.