X/Twitter has its own data centers, this is for physical equipment under X’s control. They need to get a judgment (which the article indicates they’re working on) before they can do anything. Presumably after months to years of litigation they can then repossess the servers, but then X would probably at the last minute pay the bill.
Shutting down a service that hasn’t been paid for seems as simple as getting the power turned off for not paying your electric bill. Why is it worse than not paying for services?
The company seems to be a hardware provider, not a service provider. Also, they wouldn’t be able to resell these machines anyway as they were custom made specifically for Twitter before musk bought it. Without a court order that would involve breaking and entering, and possible theft charges.
Turn off the servers
X/Twitter has its own data centers, this is for physical equipment under X’s control. They need to get a judgment (which the article indicates they’re working on) before they can do anything. Presumably after months to years of litigation they can then repossess the servers, but then X would probably at the last minute pay the bill.
Repo
legally, you can’t. It’s actually worse.
Shutting down a service that hasn’t been paid for seems as simple as getting the power turned off for not paying your electric bill. Why is it worse than not paying for services?
The company seems to be a hardware provider, not a service provider. Also, they wouldn’t be able to resell these machines anyway as they were custom made specifically for Twitter before musk bought it. Without a court order that would involve breaking and entering, and possible theft charges.
Makes sense, ty. I misinterpreted the situation.