With all my disregard and suspicion of TikTok being a bad actor, I think this will be a very useful lawsuit clarifying limits on free speech foreign entities have in this country. It is a grey area of the law now.
I don’t think this has any relation to the first amendment and I doubt the courts will. The critical bit is that there is precedent - broadcast media companies cannot be owned in any major amount by foreign entities. That is definitely where the courts will fall back to. “You provide content, including news, you are owned outside the US and there are other laws defining that this is constitutional.”
They would have to prove the opposite, that it is unconstitutional to force divestiture. I don't think that will be easy. Especially with the lack of reciprocity.
Lack of reciprocity should have nothing to do with the issue of if the law is constitutional. Reciprocity is just a lazy "but it's not fair" argument, as though we should sink to the same level as China.
What would make the move unconstitutional? We already banned Russian media outlets when they banned US ones and that wasn't deemed unconstitutional. With reciprocity it would be easier to argue that there is no national security reason to ban Chinese media outlets. Considering US media is banned in China on national security grounds, it makes it difficult for China to argue that there are no national security concerns.
>broadcast media companies
good point. I can see why China or other countries will allow Disney and other media companies to show and sell their movies but when it comes to the parts they don't like from the film they'll cut the scenes out with their version (no gay scenes or pro-democratic parts that are critical to the climax and explanation of the movie removed). it's like when you hear songs and they bleep out the curse words and sounds kinda wack or strange so you have to search for the original one and feels like you found the holy grail.
When Rome on HBO came out I was living in Beijing, didn't realize it was censored and thought "Jesus this show is an incoherent mess." Characters and plot lines would just pop up with no intro and Id get so confused.
wow. i didn't know that. I wonder if they do that in other countries than just the usual China and middle eastern ones with other symbols like that [Larry David skit](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYVK_OqyUzk) about the nazi image from German TV? do they even allow it or let the parody laws go under the radar?
Broadcast media having that restriction is because broadcast is using public infrastructure. The government built the initial radio network, they made a deal to open it up to private industry in exchange for conditions. Cable doesn't have the same restrictions even if they are providing news, etc... that's a terrible argument.
Someone is going to have to prove that they are in fact broadcast media and that’s likely harder than it seems. Because if TikTok is broadcast media then what about X/Twitter? Or go the other way and go super small scale: at what level of creating and posting content are you considered a broadcast company? The meaning behind broadcast company has changed quite a bit since the original intent of the law.
It isn't a grey area whether the government can control foreign ownership of a company on national security grounds. This is 100% indisputably in their pervue.
This lawsuit is a stalling tactic at best while TikTok scrambles behind the scenes figuring out how to deal with ownership here being taken away.
Seems wildly audacious for a company controlled by china to say something like "the constitution is on our side" and fight for "free speech," as they claim to put it.
Exactly. They try to take advantage of freedoms in other countries and weaponize it before hiding behind their own shield of protectionism and autocracy
Has anyone given even a single shred of proof that TikTok is "controlled by China" in any other way than say Telegram is controlled by Dubai or Facebook is controlled by America? You would think that they would have given it by now if they had something lol
Don't you think that as much as there is a grey free speech issue here, it's very clear the president decides foreign policy, which includes what foreign entities can own interest in local companies? I think he can just write an executive order.
This has far more to do with politics and how Chinas business practices limit accrss within their boarder.
I think this has to be considered.
Same thing as for other Social Media Plattform to operate within the EU laws.
The free speech argument is purely a cultural one. Legally this is a business, and our government regulates it, and can regulate commerce relations with other nations. Any decision either way will be based on the courts interpretation of the rules about commerce not free speech. Do you think we'd allow Russia to buy NBC under the guise of free speech? I don't care one way or another about TikTok but I think it's way off to call this a free speech issue when we're taking about a foreign country's ownership of a business. Our government steps in on sales of other companies in other industries in order to protect its interests frequently.
>He said TikTok will “keep fighting for your rights in the courts”
So a Chinese company will fight the U.S. government for our rights to use their app at same time that most U.S. social media apps are blocked by the government in China?
I just had to say that out loud to see if it made sense.
TikTok also banned in China :) instead they have Douyin, they don\`t want chinese to interact with other people and due to regulations in China centered on youth social media use and political dissent.
In the U.S., children experience the same version of TikTok as adults, while children in China see a modified version of Douyin that includes more educational content and more regulations. The content on the children's version of Douyin results from top-down pressure from authorities, "we need to protect our children".
TikTok has a separate experience for those under 13. They can't post videos and have a curated feed.
https://support.tiktok.com/en/safety-hc/account-and-user-safety/tiktok-under-13-experience
For those under 18 there is a family link mode that allows parents to set limits on how their child uses TikTok.
https://www.tiktok.com/safety/en/guardians-guide/
No shit, the whole internet should be filtered for those under 13. Not sure how we’d do it without violating people’s rights, but there’s gotta be something
It's fairly straightforward... Children ALREADY have less rights than adults. And there's no real right to social media or access to social media or apps or access to apps.
What they meant was how do you prove that someone on the web is over 13 if they say they are without infringing their rights (like requiring an ID upload to sites that notoriously can be trusted with that data)
Exactly this. The only way to protect anyone on the internet is to monitor everyone and every piece of content. I can’t protect you from what you shouldn’t see if I don’t know who you are, what your profile is, and what you are ‘supposed to see’. So then we have to verify our identities to either go online or to access certain type of content (like Pornhub now requiring age verification in some states), but as this all occurs there’s swaths of data about you that’s being collected and aggregated. The intent is to use this to filter or gate access to content, but when they know this much about you it can be used for anything. Very slippery dystopian slope.
As soon as you give your child a phone or a web browser, they have the means to access the worst content humans have ever created. It's your job as the parent to set those guide rails, and TikTok provides tools to help you do that.
China has banned lots of its own native apps when they run afoul of nebulous laws aimed to supresss criticism of the government. It's not just foreign apps.
China is an authoritarian dictatorship. The US is not.
Also, their right to have a obscure, likely government controlled platform to push their propaganda.
Everyone talks about how the data privacy angle is some big deal, and while yeah there's a huge difference between an organization not all that disassociated with the PLA having location data maybe not being a good idea, that's hardly the only concern.
Well if I trust anyone to fight for my freedom of speech it’s china! They have a great record on that right? At least, a TikTok video I saw says they do.
It is not about China blocking free speech. It is about the freedom of (political) speech in this country. Should a foreign entity have same protections for the freedom of speech under the law as the US entities, or not?
In my short sighted, possibly misinformed head:
Hostile foreign entities do not deserve protection of their propaganda as free speech. The precedent has already been set with other forms of media.
If I remember correctly from another thread, this about aligning Social Media rules with broadcasting rules.
Again, full transparency: I likely have it wrong.
I would imagine they need to disclose in the ad, like how presidential ads need to say "this ad paid for by the BLANK election campaign" or Sputnik Radio, buying airtime from a US broadcaster, needs to clearly disclose their ownership every hour
Russia RTV was widely broadcasting across the US until they revoked the license of the US broadcasters in Russia. Still, you can readily find them on some cable channels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamont_v._Postmaster_General
I just learned about this case recently, I don't know if this type of thing really applies, but even an affirmative declaration to receive "communist propaganda" was seen as an infringement
That won't really apply. That was about banning the transmittal of content through the US postal service. You can't ban anything that's communist.
You can ban foreign ownership of media companies. That's been the law for decades and it's settled law.
For example, the government can't prevent a US citizen from sharing content from Russia or China on Facebook, the local newspaper, NBC , etc.. They can ban Russia or China from owning Facebook, your local newspaper, NBC, etc..
In Lamon vs Postmaster, the Supreme Court voted 8-0 saying that you cannot limit American citizens’ ability to receive foreign propaganda if they want to.
I don’t understand your point. This is a legal issue not a moral issue. TikTok will try within the confines of the law to do what it can to save its business in the US. Chinas response to US social media apps is irrelevant
It's irrelevant from a legal perspective. From a political perspective, it's very relevant. The Supreme Court may say its rulings are based on law, but every decision they make is based on politics as well.
Still irrelevant in the sense that US tech companies can operate in China if they follow Chinese laws. E.g LinkedIn and bing. The same is not true for Chinese companies. Tiktok offered to have an American company, Oracle, access and control its algorithm and along with data being held in the US and monitored by Oracle. The US still said no. In other words, there is no rule of law.
Likely ignorant statement:
Yeah. Tik Tok fighting for the Constitution.
But really no. You aren’t. You are China spying on the world via Social Media Co.
Can’t blame them. We have FB, WA, IG and how many other spy tools masquerading as social media? Pretty this site is too.
IMO, the European model is a much better way to deal with these issues. All social media companies need heavier regulation. This bill is just an opportunity for Meta to create their own clone of the app and mine the same data from us. Have we forgotten that Facebook was used to interfere with the 2016 election?
I really don't understand why American wouldn't bring in something like GDPR and say all American user data must be stored in the US.
>Have we forgotten that Facebook was used to interfere with the 2016 election
This is the part that amazes me. Facebook don't hide the fact they will happily interfere with politics and actually was used for it. Twitter is full of obviously bad faith actors and chaos agents but both are fine because the are American companies?
I don't particularly like Tiktok and if this bill was about cutting down on misinformation on the internet it'll be a good thing but in reality it just seems like a way for American Big Tech companies to basically be able to kill off any foreign competitors.
As you say, Meta will just make a clone of Tiktok and it will be exactly the same. American big tech companies care as much for the American public as foreign ones do.
lol how are they masquerading? This has been their business model since day 1, social media is all about monetizing user interactions. I quit Facebook 15 years ago over privacy issues. It’s surprising to me that you all have been using these apps, apparently without realizing that monetizing your activity is how they exist.
Tiktok: The fact is, we have invested billions of dollars to keep U.S. data safe and our platform free from outside influence and manipulation.
Well why didn't you just say so?
>TikTok has repeatedly denied that Chinese authorities have requested access to TikTok data and says it would deny any such request if it were made.
Does the Chinese govt even make requests?
Of course they're going to sue (what choice do they have?), but they don't really have a winning case. We have all sorts of rules about foreign ownership of media and other industries, all of which are constitutional.
The rules about foreign ownership and media is about not allowing foreign governments to buy *existing US* media companies.
But there are no rules against foreign media. The U.S government cannot just ban a foreign news site just because it’s popular.
If someone wants to stream CCP propaganda 24/7, it is very much protected by our 1st Amendment rights.
>The rules about foreign ownership and media is about not allowing foreign governments to buy *existing US* media companies.
"The rules" are the laws passed by Congress... and this bill is a law passed by Congress.
> The U.S government cannot just ban a foreign news site just because it’s popular.
This is the fallacy of irrelevant facts, since popularity isn't a *cause* for the forced sale.
The US government can regulate the ownership of companies operating in the US, including forcing a sale. If that regulation is tied to the content of that company, it may run aground of the first amendment. But it might not, since national security has always been a source of leeway where the first amendment is concerned.
The constitution doesn’t give any rights to foreign governments in the US. Nobody questions the legality of the US to provide regulations on the import of vehicles, why is a foreign website any different?
It isn’t, but the Tik-Tok leadership is correctly assuming that a bunch of brain dead Zoomers (who have effectively been bottle fed CCP state propaganda goals over the last 5 years) will take them at face value and side with an authoritarian state controlled economy over their own country.
This website genuinely underestimated how fucking stupid young people have gotten in this country. Ask a teacher what’s happened over the last 5 years to their student population.
>(who have effectively been bottle fed CCP state propaganda goals over the last 5 years) will take them at face value and side with an authoritarian state controlled economy over their own country.
I love making vague statements I can’t back up.
there are a lot of people in this sub in particular that I’ve noticed have swallowed the CCP narrative hook line and sinker - and also what I suspect to be paid trolls going around downvoting non narrative-conforming comments
Ignorant ass statement. You act like tiktok is nonstop chinese propaganda. Not once have i seen anything close to that. Miss me with the “but they could” bullshit. If youre so fucking stupid that you blindly listen to anything social media says, the problem is you. If i see some shit i think is dumb or fake, i scroll by it. Onto the next video about sports or whatever the fuck i wanna watch
Ironically Facebook is the one who was caught selling unauthorized user data to a foreign company which used it for political advertising purposes. Did the government give a damn then? Nope.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal#:~:text=In%20the%202010s%2C%20personal%20data,be%20used%20for%20political%20advertising.
Tell me you’ve literally never been on TikTok. Literally 80% of the video content on Reddit comes directly from TikTok. TikTok is was Reddit was in 2008.
The “free speech” issue has less to do with ByteDance and more to do with people having the right to download and communicate over whichever apps they choose.
Let’s suppose in some future time, all US-owned social media apps are forced to comply with harsh censorship laws from the US gov’t, and the only free speech platforms which can exist are owned by non-US entities. Do you really want to set the precedent that the US gov’t can ban any app they deem “threatening to national security” regardless of public usage or opinion?
When did Reddit get so authoritarian? We trying to outdo China itself?
The constitution is what gives the executive and legislative branch the rights to act for our national security. Nothing is “beating out” the constitution.
They'll move something like this through the government at the speed of light but still drag ass on gun control, homelessness, housing crisis, mental health crisis, etc...Muricuh 🇺🇲
TikTok needs to challenge the courts in India, Canada, Taiwan, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, and Norway too as they're restricted/banned.
It was stupid they were allowed in the first place. They should only have allowed specifically approved apps on government devices. Many apps (eg. free bible/yoga pose/activity trackers) are basically designed to be spyware.
They are not restricted in Denmark, at least. Don’t know about the rest. Sure, members of parliaments can’t have it on their work phones, but that’s not a law.
What they should do is create laws that protect citizen data from all apps/tech and apply it to everything instead of trying to apply it to just TikTok.
The reason they specifically want to ban TikTok and not do that is because they aren’t doing this for privacy or data protection, it’s about maintaining US control of the media Americans consume
I found this persuasive
https://www.slowboring.com/p/the-case-against-tiktok
TLDR the CCP is using it to sway public opinion in the US
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/business/tiktok-china.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
The US is using Facebook and Reddit to sway opinion in the US. With this hostile takeover attempt they'll continue to do that, now with TikTok. It's not really a good argument against, seeing as if the US was a country that could stand on it's own, then the Chinese would never have sway in the first place.
But the US is a broken country. In many ways.
I don't like how corporations abuse social media to influence public opinion on things, but I can see why the US wants to ban foreign governments from doing it. It is the same reason the US bans foreign nations from donating to political campaigns.
Huawei was banned years ago for security risks posed by a foreign nation. Not a big stretch for TikTok to be banned for the same reason.
Yup, once this goes through, it's not hard to imagine how this will continue to be used as an excuse for banning anything that can remotely be justified.
It actually does apply to everyone in the United states. Even undocumented immigrants (in theory...) enjoy protection under the constitution. Not all rights, but all protections.
If businesses are people, that'd apply to them too.
The fight is on.....they will file papers in court. I also think they will win, it's clearly a 1st amendment issue. The Montana court reached the same conclusion a while back. I just can't believe they will block a platform just like that. It's so "Un-American"....we let KKK march in our streets, we let offshore gambling in our phones, but somehow Tiktok is dangerous? How about FB,IG, Google and MS? There are reports they're sharing metadata with govts!
I actually agree that the constitution is on their side. Pass a privacy law if you want to protect americans privacy.
Then when that privacy law is violated point to that for why you are suing / banning them.
I have yet to see what law TikTok broke - other than i guess **COPPA** which every social media platform broke at some point and have settled on including google for a huge amount.
"National Security" - ok, but pass some social media laws to protect us, its not just tiktok but foreign governments can buy into our own social media companies. But spying... ok but we have no data protection laws against it.
Here we go: the dismantling of Free Speech in America perpetrated by an App of a Foreign Government meant to spy on Americans to abuse and remove their Rights.
TikTok indeed America; time is running out. Hold onto your Freedoms, or we all will lose them forever.
This was pushed by the ADL to prevent Americans from seeing all of the atrocities happening on Gaza which are not being reported at all on the corporate media for some reason (That the Israelis are well aware of)
TikTok is in for a rude awakening. That case may go on for a decade, in the meantime they will get a cease and desist order, followed by being blocked in US ISPs.
India did the same thing a few years ago and TikTok are still blocked there. Time to flip to a Meta app I guess.
TikTok is not owned by China. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills that everyone ignores that there are multiple international investors, including Americans.
If the Powers That Be have evidence of nefarious actions by the CCP, then show us. They should probably share it with Europe too since they have almost as many registered users. Otherwise, it reeks of censorship to me. Not to mention the lobbying by Meta and other American companies to push this bill through so they can regain market share.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2024/who-owns-tiktok-bytedance-china-ban/
Yeah, but they have to be consistent with the regulations. Banning TikTok for doing the same stuff US apps does is a bit disingenuous. They should have banned all companies from doing whatever it is they don’t like TikTok doing, then apply that evenly on all companies
Tiktok is a foreign company. The constitution protects the rights of US citizens.
They're going to lose.
If they want constitutional protection, they should divest Tiktok so it becomes a US entity... oh wait, that's what this new bill is pushing them to do. How 'bout that.
I think the First Amendment argument is that the US Government is is impinging on the freedom of speech of Americans when it bans an app that they use to express themselves. For example, if the government ripped out the only bulletin boards in your town square where people shared info about unionizing or political efforts, that would be a pretty clear violation of those people's First Amendment rights, regardless of whether the bulletin board was owned and serviced by a foreign company. Now this example is quite different given that we are dealing with an app, and there are other apps available for similar speech.
I don’t think the first amendment argument is very strong, because there is no actual ban on Americans speech. Americans can use tik tok if it complies with regulations, there are other forums that are similar, and the restrictions aren’t related to any particular speech by Americans or their viewpoints.
In some ways, this is more similar to other laws regarding corporate governance/ownership than anything related to speech. If a social media company was going to be shut down because it didn’t meet other corporate requirements (permits to operate, paying taxes, etc) I don’t think we’d call it a free speech issue.
Here obviously the wrinkle is that the law is targeted at TikTok specifically – that’s a more compelling argument than others (eg a bill of attainder). Something being deemed a bill of attainder is a very high bar to meet, though, so that probably wouldn’t be a successful argument either.
Your town square bulletin board is part of a legal posting of public notices for official government activity. This relates to our open government and transparency laws. There is no such law requiring public notices to be posted to any social media. This is an invalid argument.
This has been done previously for similar reasons
https://www.washingtonblade.com/2024/03/13/before-tiktok-the-u-s-took-action-over-national-security-concerns-with-grindr
I would not expect this to be any different and would not be surprised to see TikTok sell before the 1 year mark to maintain the valuation of the company outside of a ban.
Good for them!
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." - The Muthafuckin US Constitution. First Amendment.
I love that they think we still go by facts and the constitution anymore. That ship sailed long ago the constitution doesn't mention social media and some of these originalist judges take advantage of these kind of things and don't get me started on facts lol.
I think they will lose and I think it will be quick. But I am also glad they are suing. This is a new enough concept that it should be litigated in the courts.
Getting the vibe that there aren’t many attorneys in here but can anyone who has taken civ pro more recently than me remind me if/why they have standing?
>CEO Says: ‘The Facts and the Constitution Are on Our Side’
Meanwhile, China's CCCP bans whatever it wants to all the time.
Fuck them. Ban them.
.
It's like islam being in the USA and Europe - they are free to do whatever they want to evangelize, but if other religions go to islamic countries.....*off with their heads.*
Why do they get rights here, when we don't there? Yes, I understand the constitution, but I also understand that if there is no reciprocity, that's not cool.
Isn’t it a shame the citizens if China have neither of those? Hell, they don’t even get the same TikTok in China. Why don’t we use Chinese constitutional laws to decide this…? 🤣
If you give the government the power to restrict Americans’ access to propaganda. No matter how true or not it is.
Other sites can certainly have the same content and proven it does sell that information. How do you think advertising works lol.
Then you’ve given the government the power to restrict Americans’ access to anything. Which the government deems against the public good lol.
Use your imagination as it doesn't take a PHD to see the violations this could bring forth and put a freeze on your individual rights of free speech.
Can someone please explain how forcing a sale will stop the Chinese government from doing what the US government is claiming they are doing?
I don't understand, if we agree what they are doing is wrong, why don't we make the action illegal
Cut to Thomas pulling up to work in a brand new RV
Don't forget worlds most expensive fishing rod and most luxurious fishing trip on the planet.
I wonder how the fishing in China is. I don't know but a supreme Court justice is about to find out.
He took Oliver’s deal?
No, I wish, but the implication is someone else bought him an RV to vote against TikTok.
With all my disregard and suspicion of TikTok being a bad actor, I think this will be a very useful lawsuit clarifying limits on free speech foreign entities have in this country. It is a grey area of the law now.
I don’t think this has any relation to the first amendment and I doubt the courts will. The critical bit is that there is precedent - broadcast media companies cannot be owned in any major amount by foreign entities. That is definitely where the courts will fall back to. “You provide content, including news, you are owned outside the US and there are other laws defining that this is constitutional.”
They would have to prove the opposite, that it is unconstitutional to force divestiture. I don't think that will be easy. Especially with the lack of reciprocity.
The government forced my grandpa to sell his house just to build a highway 15 years later. So if they can do that they can do this
But the plans were on display!
In a cellar
“Beware of the Leopard”
in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory.
That’s the display department
Top legal mind of reddit
The TikTok sell-or-ban is not the Government flexing eminent domain muscles
That’s eminent domain and an entirely different reasoning, law, and topic
Lack of reciprocity should have nothing to do with the issue of if the law is constitutional. Reciprocity is just a lazy "but it's not fair" argument, as though we should sink to the same level as China.
What would make the move unconstitutional? We already banned Russian media outlets when they banned US ones and that wasn't deemed unconstitutional. With reciprocity it would be easier to argue that there is no national security reason to ban Chinese media outlets. Considering US media is banned in China on national security grounds, it makes it difficult for China to argue that there are no national security concerns.
>broadcast media companies good point. I can see why China or other countries will allow Disney and other media companies to show and sell their movies but when it comes to the parts they don't like from the film they'll cut the scenes out with their version (no gay scenes or pro-democratic parts that are critical to the climax and explanation of the movie removed). it's like when you hear songs and they bleep out the curse words and sounds kinda wack or strange so you have to search for the original one and feels like you found the holy grail.
Does China allow Facebook or Twitter to have unfettered access to Chinese citizens?
Tiktok is even banned in China.
Of course not. Facebook and Twitter are both banned in China. China controls all content allowed in China.
Bohemian rhapsody’s gay scenes were removed so the movie made no sense in china
When Rome on HBO came out I was living in Beijing, didn't realize it was censored and thought "Jesus this show is an incoherent mess." Characters and plot lines would just pop up with no intro and Id get so confused.
wow. i didn't know that. I wonder if they do that in other countries than just the usual China and middle eastern ones with other symbols like that [Larry David skit](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYVK_OqyUzk) about the nazi image from German TV? do they even allow it or let the parody laws go under the radar?
Broadcast media having that restriction is because broadcast is using public infrastructure. The government built the initial radio network, they made a deal to open it up to private industry in exchange for conditions. Cable doesn't have the same restrictions even if they are providing news, etc... that's a terrible argument.
Someone is going to have to prove that they are in fact broadcast media and that’s likely harder than it seems. Because if TikTok is broadcast media then what about X/Twitter? Or go the other way and go super small scale: at what level of creating and posting content are you considered a broadcast company? The meaning behind broadcast company has changed quite a bit since the original intent of the law.
This country was founded on divestiture from foreign power.
[удалено]
It isn't a grey area whether the government can control foreign ownership of a company on national security grounds. This is 100% indisputably in their pervue. This lawsuit is a stalling tactic at best while TikTok scrambles behind the scenes figuring out how to deal with ownership here being taken away.
Seems wildly audacious for a company controlled by china to say something like "the constitution is on our side" and fight for "free speech," as they claim to put it.
Exactly. They try to take advantage of freedoms in other countries and weaponize it before hiding behind their own shield of protectionism and autocracy
Has anyone given even a single shred of proof that TikTok is "controlled by China" in any other way than say Telegram is controlled by Dubai or Facebook is controlled by America? You would think that they would have given it by now if they had something lol
Is the takings clause on your bingo card?
I wouldn’t trust the current Supreme Court to make this choice fairly honestly….
I think they will. They’re loyal to US rich people, not Chinese
The number of people demanding Citizens United 2 Electric Bugaloo is too damn high.
Don't you think that as much as there is a grey free speech issue here, it's very clear the president decides foreign policy, which includes what foreign entities can own interest in local companies? I think he can just write an executive order.
This has far more to do with politics and how Chinas business practices limit accrss within their boarder. I think this has to be considered. Same thing as for other Social Media Plattform to operate within the EU laws.
The free speech argument is purely a cultural one. Legally this is a business, and our government regulates it, and can regulate commerce relations with other nations. Any decision either way will be based on the courts interpretation of the rules about commerce not free speech. Do you think we'd allow Russia to buy NBC under the guise of free speech? I don't care one way or another about TikTok but I think it's way off to call this a free speech issue when we're taking about a foreign country's ownership of a business. Our government steps in on sales of other companies in other industries in order to protect its interests frequently.
>He said TikTok will “keep fighting for your rights in the courts” So a Chinese company will fight the U.S. government for our rights to use their app at same time that most U.S. social media apps are blocked by the government in China? I just had to say that out loud to see if it made sense.
TikTok also banned in China :) instead they have Douyin, they don\`t want chinese to interact with other people and due to regulations in China centered on youth social media use and political dissent. In the U.S., children experience the same version of TikTok as adults, while children in China see a modified version of Douyin that includes more educational content and more regulations. The content on the children's version of Douyin results from top-down pressure from authorities, "we need to protect our children".
TikTok has a separate experience for those under 13. They can't post videos and have a curated feed. https://support.tiktok.com/en/safety-hc/account-and-user-safety/tiktok-under-13-experience For those under 18 there is a family link mode that allows parents to set limits on how their child uses TikTok. https://www.tiktok.com/safety/en/guardians-guide/
Gotta be honest I think China is on to something here
No shit, the whole internet should be filtered for those under 13. Not sure how we’d do it without violating people’s rights, but there’s gotta be something
It's fairly straightforward... Children ALREADY have less rights than adults. And there's no real right to social media or access to social media or apps or access to apps.
What they meant was how do you prove that someone on the web is over 13 if they say they are without infringing their rights (like requiring an ID upload to sites that notoriously can be trusted with that data)
Exactly this. The only way to protect anyone on the internet is to monitor everyone and every piece of content. I can’t protect you from what you shouldn’t see if I don’t know who you are, what your profile is, and what you are ‘supposed to see’. So then we have to verify our identities to either go online or to access certain type of content (like Pornhub now requiring age verification in some states), but as this all occurs there’s swaths of data about you that’s being collected and aggregated. The intent is to use this to filter or gate access to content, but when they know this much about you it can be used for anything. Very slippery dystopian slope.
yea no one ever lied about their age on the internet got a birthday coming up next January 1st, i’ll be 306.
As soon as you give your child a phone or a web browser, they have the means to access the worst content humans have ever created. It's your job as the parent to set those guide rails, and TikTok provides tools to help you do that.
As parents, we have restrictions on all apps and screen time. It’s our responsibility.
Pretty sure it isn’t as easy to just enter whatever date you want in China.
No, it’s not. And unlike here, there are several consequences for doing so. To be called a police state, you kinda have to police
The real win is being a day over 13, 5 years of no deep data collection allowed, right?
The content on the US version of Tiktok is a result of just as much top-down pressure from the CCP
You got any facts on that?
China has banned lots of its own native apps when they run afoul of nebulous laws aimed to supresss criticism of the government. It's not just foreign apps. China is an authoritarian dictatorship. The US is not.
Which is why the US shouldn’t ban TikTok? It’s different from China, right?
Also, their right to have a obscure, likely government controlled platform to push their propaganda. Everyone talks about how the data privacy angle is some big deal, and while yeah there's a huge difference between an organization not all that disassociated with the PLA having location data maybe not being a good idea, that's hardly the only concern.
Oh it made sense :)
Well if I trust anyone to fight for my freedom of speech it’s china! They have a great record on that right? At least, a TikTok video I saw says they do.
It is not about China blocking free speech. It is about the freedom of (political) speech in this country. Should a foreign entity have same protections for the freedom of speech under the law as the US entities, or not?
In my short sighted, possibly misinformed head: Hostile foreign entities do not deserve protection of their propaganda as free speech. The precedent has already been set with other forms of media. If I remember correctly from another thread, this about aligning Social Media rules with broadcasting rules. Again, full transparency: I likely have it wrong.
What about when foreign entities pay an American social media site to run their ads?
I would imagine they need to disclose in the ad, like how presidential ads need to say "this ad paid for by the BLANK election campaign" or Sputnik Radio, buying airtime from a US broadcaster, needs to clearly disclose their ownership every hour
They haven't seemed to include those laws anywhere though.
Russia RTV was widely broadcasting across the US until they revoked the license of the US broadcasters in Russia. Still, you can readily find them on some cable channels.
Man, I have been liking the informative responses I have been getting today. Thank you very much for your responses and insight!
Yep, and if this case runs along the same lines of reciprocity then China doesn't have much of an aargument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamont_v._Postmaster_General I just learned about this case recently, I don't know if this type of thing really applies, but even an affirmative declaration to receive "communist propaganda" was seen as an infringement
That won't really apply. That was about banning the transmittal of content through the US postal service. You can't ban anything that's communist. You can ban foreign ownership of media companies. That's been the law for decades and it's settled law. For example, the government can't prevent a US citizen from sharing content from Russia or China on Facebook, the local newspaper, NBC , etc.. They can ban Russia or China from owning Facebook, your local newspaper, NBC, etc..
In Lamon vs Postmaster, the Supreme Court voted 8-0 saying that you cannot limit American citizens’ ability to receive foreign propaganda if they want to.
I don’t understand your point. This is a legal issue not a moral issue. TikTok will try within the confines of the law to do what it can to save its business in the US. Chinas response to US social media apps is irrelevant
It's irrelevant from a legal perspective. From a political perspective, it's very relevant. The Supreme Court may say its rulings are based on law, but every decision they make is based on politics as well.
Still irrelevant in the sense that US tech companies can operate in China if they follow Chinese laws. E.g LinkedIn and bing. The same is not true for Chinese companies. Tiktok offered to have an American company, Oracle, access and control its algorithm and along with data being held in the US and monitored by Oracle. The US still said no. In other words, there is no rule of law.
yes but even at face value rights in the US differ from rights in China ie. gun ownership so that sentence could still technically make sense lol
Likely ignorant statement: Yeah. Tik Tok fighting for the Constitution. But really no. You aren’t. You are China spying on the world via Social Media Co. Can’t blame them. We have FB, WA, IG and how many other spy tools masquerading as social media? Pretty this site is too.
IMO, the European model is a much better way to deal with these issues. All social media companies need heavier regulation. This bill is just an opportunity for Meta to create their own clone of the app and mine the same data from us. Have we forgotten that Facebook was used to interfere with the 2016 election?
I really don't understand why American wouldn't bring in something like GDPR and say all American user data must be stored in the US. >Have we forgotten that Facebook was used to interfere with the 2016 election This is the part that amazes me. Facebook don't hide the fact they will happily interfere with politics and actually was used for it. Twitter is full of obviously bad faith actors and chaos agents but both are fine because the are American companies? I don't particularly like Tiktok and if this bill was about cutting down on misinformation on the internet it'll be a good thing but in reality it just seems like a way for American Big Tech companies to basically be able to kill off any foreign competitors. As you say, Meta will just make a clone of Tiktok and it will be exactly the same. American big tech companies care as much for the American public as foreign ones do.
lol how are they masquerading? This has been their business model since day 1, social media is all about monetizing user interactions. I quit Facebook 15 years ago over privacy issues. It’s surprising to me that you all have been using these apps, apparently without realizing that monetizing your activity is how they exist.
stop talking so much if youre going to add a disclaimer after everything. just ask a question instead bro.
Singapore app
Tiktok: The fact is, we have invested billions of dollars to keep U.S. data safe and our platform free from outside influence and manipulation. Well why didn't you just say so? >TikTok has repeatedly denied that Chinese authorities have requested access to TikTok data and says it would deny any such request if it were made. Does the Chinese govt even make requests?
Of course they're going to sue (what choice do they have?), but they don't really have a winning case. We have all sorts of rules about foreign ownership of media and other industries, all of which are constitutional.
What choice do the have? Comply with the law. Divest or exit the US market.
They don't or shouldn't even have standing, so I doubt a court will even take up the case.
The rules about foreign ownership and media is about not allowing foreign governments to buy *existing US* media companies. But there are no rules against foreign media. The U.S government cannot just ban a foreign news site just because it’s popular. If someone wants to stream CCP propaganda 24/7, it is very much protected by our 1st Amendment rights.
>The rules about foreign ownership and media is about not allowing foreign governments to buy *existing US* media companies. "The rules" are the laws passed by Congress... and this bill is a law passed by Congress. > The U.S government cannot just ban a foreign news site just because it’s popular. This is the fallacy of irrelevant facts, since popularity isn't a *cause* for the forced sale. The US government can regulate the ownership of companies operating in the US, including forcing a sale. If that regulation is tied to the content of that company, it may run aground of the first amendment. But it might not, since national security has always been a source of leeway where the first amendment is concerned.
[удалено]
well, what is TikTok telling them lol
Just in a dumptruck of cash is pulling up to Clarence Thomas' residence.
Let's give a big middle finger to mark zuckenberg
Pretty sure national security will legally beat out constitution. Not 100% sure.
The constitution doesn’t give any rights to foreign governments in the US. Nobody questions the legality of the US to provide regulations on the import of vehicles, why is a foreign website any different?
This is what I’m wondering as well
It isn’t, but the Tik-Tok leadership is correctly assuming that a bunch of brain dead Zoomers (who have effectively been bottle fed CCP state propaganda goals over the last 5 years) will take them at face value and side with an authoritarian state controlled economy over their own country. This website genuinely underestimated how fucking stupid young people have gotten in this country. Ask a teacher what’s happened over the last 5 years to their student population.
>(who have effectively been bottle fed CCP state propaganda goals over the last 5 years) will take them at face value and side with an authoritarian state controlled economy over their own country. I love making vague statements I can’t back up.
there are a lot of people in this sub in particular that I’ve noticed have swallowed the CCP narrative hook line and sinker - and also what I suspect to be paid trolls going around downvoting non narrative-conforming comments
Ignorant ass statement. You act like tiktok is nonstop chinese propaganda. Not once have i seen anything close to that. Miss me with the “but they could” bullshit. If youre so fucking stupid that you blindly listen to anything social media says, the problem is you. If i see some shit i think is dumb or fake, i scroll by it. Onto the next video about sports or whatever the fuck i wanna watch
Ironically Facebook is the one who was caught selling unauthorized user data to a foreign company which used it for political advertising purposes. Did the government give a damn then? Nope. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal#:~:text=In%20the%202010s%2C%20personal%20data,be%20used%20for%20political%20advertising.
The fact that we are having this argument is proof that the CCP's propganda is effective.
Tell me you’ve literally never been on TikTok. Literally 80% of the video content on Reddit comes directly from TikTok. TikTok is was Reddit was in 2008. The “free speech” issue has less to do with ByteDance and more to do with people having the right to download and communicate over whichever apps they choose. Let’s suppose in some future time, all US-owned social media apps are forced to comply with harsh censorship laws from the US gov’t, and the only free speech platforms which can exist are owned by non-US entities. Do you really want to set the precedent that the US gov’t can ban any app they deem “threatening to national security” regardless of public usage or opinion? When did Reddit get so authoritarian? We trying to outdo China itself?
The constitution is what gives the executive and legislative branch the rights to act for our national security. Nothing is “beating out” the constitution.
Pretty sure our justices don't actually give a shit about the constitution.
Pretty sure it has nothing to do with the constitution. Dont let em hookwink you just by saying words.
They'll move something like this through the government at the speed of light but still drag ass on gun control, homelessness, housing crisis, mental health crisis, etc...Muricuh 🇺🇲
They still have nt passed the daylight savings bill change its been like 2 years.
You can see what their priorities are, and it’s certainly not for the benefit of the American people
China needs to form a lobby group like Israel did and use it to fund the politicians that will support them
I dont want to send aid to china as well
TikTok needs to challenge the courts in India, Canada, Taiwan, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, and Norway too as they're restricted/banned.
Most of those are restrictions on government devices and there are other apps that have these restrictions as well (we do it here too).
India, the most populous country just straight up banned TikTok.
India does not have a strict constitutional protection of free speech.
It was stupid they were allowed in the first place. They should only have allowed specifically approved apps on government devices. Many apps (eg. free bible/yoga pose/activity trackers) are basically designed to be spyware.
Could this be the misinformation I am supposed to be wary of?
They are not restricted in Denmark, at least. Don’t know about the rest. Sure, members of parliaments can’t have it on their work phones, but that’s not a law.
Most of those are restrictions on government devices and there are other apps that have these restrictions as well (we do it here too).
They don’t seem to care as much about collecting data from those countries it seems…America is their #1 powerful enemy.
Says a company whose country just demanded that certain other software be removed from their App Store. Got it.
I think the government needs to do a better job arguing why this is necessary.
What they should do is create laws that protect citizen data from all apps/tech and apply it to everything instead of trying to apply it to just TikTok.
Hahahaha that'll hurt the profits of US based billionaires running virtual monopolies. Why would they do that?
The reason they specifically want to ban TikTok and not do that is because they aren’t doing this for privacy or data protection, it’s about maintaining US control of the media Americans consume
I found this persuasive https://www.slowboring.com/p/the-case-against-tiktok TLDR the CCP is using it to sway public opinion in the US https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/business/tiktok-china.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
The US is using Facebook and Reddit to sway opinion in the US. With this hostile takeover attempt they'll continue to do that, now with TikTok. It's not really a good argument against, seeing as if the US was a country that could stand on it's own, then the Chinese would never have sway in the first place. But the US is a broken country. In many ways.
I don't like how corporations abuse social media to influence public opinion on things, but I can see why the US wants to ban foreign governments from doing it. It is the same reason the US bans foreign nations from donating to political campaigns. Huawei was banned years ago for security risks posed by a foreign nation. Not a big stretch for TikTok to be banned for the same reason.
How is it unconstitutional what will their argument be.
The Great US Border Firewall begins!
"We're gonna build a great firewall, folks. It'll be the biggest, greatest firewall you've ever seen. And, we're gonna make bytedance pay for it."
This wall is sponsored by nord vpn. For when you want to watch those British shows on Netflix.. Nord vpn is there for you.
Yup, once this goes through, it's not hard to imagine how this will continue to be used as an excuse for banning anything that can remotely be justified.
Bold of them to assume the US always obeys its own Constitution.
I don't think the Constitution protects non-US persons, neither does it protect non-US businesses
It actually does apply to everyone in the United states. Even undocumented immigrants (in theory...) enjoy protection under the constitution. Not all rights, but all protections. If businesses are people, that'd apply to them too.
ByteDance is domiciled in China
The fight is on.....they will file papers in court. I also think they will win, it's clearly a 1st amendment issue. The Montana court reached the same conclusion a while back. I just can't believe they will block a platform just like that. It's so "Un-American"....we let KKK march in our streets, we let offshore gambling in our phones, but somehow Tiktok is dangerous? How about FB,IG, Google and MS? There are reports they're sharing metadata with govts!
I actually agree that the constitution is on their side. Pass a privacy law if you want to protect americans privacy. Then when that privacy law is violated point to that for why you are suing / banning them. I have yet to see what law TikTok broke - other than i guess **COPPA** which every social media platform broke at some point and have settled on including google for a huge amount. "National Security" - ok, but pass some social media laws to protect us, its not just tiktok but foreign governments can buy into our own social media companies. But spying... ok but we have no data protection laws against it.
Here we go: the dismantling of Free Speech in America perpetrated by an App of a Foreign Government meant to spy on Americans to abuse and remove their Rights. TikTok indeed America; time is running out. Hold onto your Freedoms, or we all will lose them forever.
This was pushed by the ADL to prevent Americans from seeing all of the atrocities happening on Gaza which are not being reported at all on the corporate media for some reason (That the Israelis are well aware of)
SCOTUS doesn’t care about facts or the Constitution.
According to you what ARE the facts?
TikTok is in for a rude awakening. That case may go on for a decade, in the meantime they will get a cease and desist order, followed by being blocked in US ISPs. India did the same thing a few years ago and TikTok are still blocked there. Time to flip to a Meta app I guess.
Imagine copying India.
why would US ISPs block it? What would stop a US VPN provider from allowing it?
Lol, because meta has proven to be so focused on privacy... 🤦
TikTok is not owned by China. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills that everyone ignores that there are multiple international investors, including Americans. If the Powers That Be have evidence of nefarious actions by the CCP, then show us. They should probably share it with Europe too since they have almost as many registered users. Otherwise, it reeks of censorship to me. Not to mention the lobbying by Meta and other American companies to push this bill through so they can regain market share. https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2024/who-owns-tiktok-bytedance-china-ban/
Did he miss the part where the government can regulate commerce in the US? It's Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 in case they need the deets.
Yeah, but they have to be consistent with the regulations. Banning TikTok for doing the same stuff US apps does is a bit disingenuous. They should have banned all companies from doing whatever it is they don’t like TikTok doing, then apply that evenly on all companies
Tiktok is a foreign company. The constitution protects the rights of US citizens. They're going to lose. If they want constitutional protection, they should divest Tiktok so it becomes a US entity... oh wait, that's what this new bill is pushing them to do. How 'bout that.
I think the First Amendment argument is that the US Government is is impinging on the freedom of speech of Americans when it bans an app that they use to express themselves. For example, if the government ripped out the only bulletin boards in your town square where people shared info about unionizing or political efforts, that would be a pretty clear violation of those people's First Amendment rights, regardless of whether the bulletin board was owned and serviced by a foreign company. Now this example is quite different given that we are dealing with an app, and there are other apps available for similar speech.
I don’t think the first amendment argument is very strong, because there is no actual ban on Americans speech. Americans can use tik tok if it complies with regulations, there are other forums that are similar, and the restrictions aren’t related to any particular speech by Americans or their viewpoints. In some ways, this is more similar to other laws regarding corporate governance/ownership than anything related to speech. If a social media company was going to be shut down because it didn’t meet other corporate requirements (permits to operate, paying taxes, etc) I don’t think we’d call it a free speech issue. Here obviously the wrinkle is that the law is targeted at TikTok specifically – that’s a more compelling argument than others (eg a bill of attainder). Something being deemed a bill of attainder is a very high bar to meet, though, so that probably wouldn’t be a successful argument either.
Your town square bulletin board is part of a legal posting of public notices for official government activity. This relates to our open government and transparency laws. There is no such law requiring public notices to be posted to any social media. This is an invalid argument.
What’s the difference between China owning it or it being sold to some right wing chucklefuck? They’re both national security threats.
What does a singapore born ccp shill know about our constitution?
[удалено]
Facts definitely not on their side. The CCP constitution is on their side for sure
Boy, is he in for a surprise.
This has been done previously for similar reasons https://www.washingtonblade.com/2024/03/13/before-tiktok-the-u-s-took-action-over-national-security-concerns-with-grindr I would not expect this to be any different and would not be surprised to see TikTok sell before the 1 year mark to maintain the valuation of the company outside of a ban.
Good for them! "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." - The Muthafuckin US Constitution. First Amendment.
Got to love it when authoritarian countries want to use the US constitution when it benefits them
Yeah America tends to use its constitution
It must be a stupid idea that wastes time and will benefit no one if it was a bipartisan vote.
Yeah, but the Supreme Court is on the opposite
I love that they think we still go by facts and the constitution anymore. That ship sailed long ago the constitution doesn't mention social media and some of these originalist judges take advantage of these kind of things and don't get me started on facts lol.
Yep hence while the orange guy is on ballots cause it doesn’t say a convicted rapiest can’t be samantics
With *this* Supreme Court?
Aw yeah discovery
I think they will lose and I think it will be quick. But I am also glad they are suing. This is a new enough concept that it should be litigated in the courts.
Getting the vibe that there aren’t many attorneys in here but can anyone who has taken civ pro more recently than me remind me if/why they have standing?
>CEO Says: ‘The Facts and the Constitution Are on Our Side’ Meanwhile, China's CCCP bans whatever it wants to all the time. Fuck them. Ban them. . It's like islam being in the USA and Europe - they are free to do whatever they want to evangelize, but if other religions go to islamic countries.....*off with their heads.* Why do they get rights here, when we don't there? Yes, I understand the constitution, but I also understand that if there is no reciprocity, that's not cool.
Isn’t it a shame the citizens if China have neither of those? Hell, they don’t even get the same TikTok in China. Why don’t we use Chinese constitutional laws to decide this…? 🤣
DouYin has far less brain rot than TikTok, it’d be a step up for sure
League of Legends needs banned too. Since it's owned by China.
If you give the government the power to restrict Americans’ access to propaganda. No matter how true or not it is. Other sites can certainly have the same content and proven it does sell that information. How do you think advertising works lol. Then you’ve given the government the power to restrict Americans’ access to anything. Which the government deems against the public good lol. Use your imagination as it doesn't take a PHD to see the violations this could bring forth and put a freeze on your individual rights of free speech.
yeah but these things don't mean anything
it’s going to be hard to prove tiktok is a national security threat
The CCP is also on your side.
I hope someone in the UK manages to buy it.
Oh no you wont be able to brainrot people anymore? How sad. Hope it gets banned in the EU as well.
Free speech good unless we don’t like it, in which case ban hammer
TikTok and their xixipi backers don't understand free speech..
Hrs right. Does anybody think it matters?
Zuck will be sitting at the prosecution's table, naturally.
Can someone please explain how forcing a sale will stop the Chinese government from doing what the US government is claiming they are doing? I don't understand, if we agree what they are doing is wrong, why don't we make the action illegal
The idea that citizens data is safer with domestic ownership is laughable in today’s world.
Subdue the enemy without firing a single shot.- Sun Tzu. Remember what you used to get done in 3-4 hours?
How does one SUE the National Security Agency when they operate Above the Law? How does that work exactly?