Good. We have something called "due process" in the US, and the attempted TikTok ban violates it.
Due process is a bedrock of American law. It means government officials can't just "do what they want" and make arbitrary decisions with specific targets -- which is exactly what the TikTok ban is.
You want to ban TikTok? Great, you need a specific law from Congress that outlines under what circumstances companies may be banned in the US, and then prove the specific company meets those standards.
None of that has been done here. The president is not a dictator. TikTok should absolutely sue.
Note: this is regardless of anything TikTok has actually done privacy- or security-wise. The point isn't whether they're dangerous, the point is whether we can meet some standard of showing that they're dangerous. If they're dangerous, we need to establish how and why legally. This is what separates the rule of law from dictatorship.
Exactly. As far as I'm aware, TikTok is pretty much malware, meant to collect every single possible piece of information it can get access to on your phone, so I would recommend everybody to avoid it, and I'm not opposed to a ban at all.
What matters is the way it's banned. And why. And the current process feels every bit as wrong as TikTok itself.
What the US needs is proper data protection laws. And then it should enforce those laws equally against US and foreign companies. Just arbitrarily banning one thing because you realise that what you always allowed for US companies, is suddenly a problem when it's a Chinese company, is absolutely wrong.
TikTok collects less data then Facebook, Linkedin, Google, and thousands of other apps in the app store. "It collects so much info" is pure FUD.. the app doesn't even request the Location permission FFS.
Haven't seen any report on TikTok spying, what I've seen is an in depth analysis that shows it justs reports the usual system specs and does it securely (as any app handling private data should) https://medium.com/@fs0c131y/tiktok-logs-logs-logs-e93e81626...
How much data can TikTok get on my phone without me knowing?
Also how is this different than Twitter that was getting a list of all installed apps until Apple tightened down on the method they used and everything that FB and Google does.
you can argue the same way to apps by Fb, Google, and etc. I guess you would also call Fb app a malware and recommend avoid it too?
I dont mean to justify what TikTok did, but I'm curious what apps are not malware?
That ship has sailed long back. With the patriot act and other legislations in this area that gives enormous power to the executive , also the secretive FISA court which hardly rejects any warrant requests etc , there is no real due process when it concerns “national security” .
Congress can hardly control the three letter agencies violating amercian rights on a massive scale or blatantly lie under oath in testimony
Don’t think a foreign company is going to allowed to actually proceed with a suit involving national security as the administration is going ton claim
Yes CFIUS is due process but this executive order isn't CFIUS. CFIUS can order the unwinding of the original deal but not some arbitrary action including demanding a sales commission.
"You want to ban TikTok? Great, you need a specific law from Congress that outlines under what circumstances companies may be banned in the US, and then prove the specific company meets those standards."
There is a specific law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which specifies when and how a president can ban economic exchanges with foreign entities. I think you will be disappointed to find out that under this law there is no real due process required. The president only needs to declare a national emergency in regards to the ban and then send a report to Congress detailing why the declaration and ban are justified. If Congress disagrees it is justified they can pass a resolution overriding the ban.
Due process resulted in the presidency having way too much power.
Now, due process has to start focusing on increasing the federal structure of state’s power and the power that comes with their senators / house / etc.
So if the problem is that TikTok is gathering too much invasive data on US citizens (and supposedly siphoning it to China), and their defence is basically "So what, it's legal and everyone else is doing it too!", then isn't the obvious solution making actual digital privacy legislation that would make such data vacuuming illegal? That would solve the problem and make the American market a fair playing field rather than this hamfisted protectionism.
The problem isn't digital privacy; it's a fair bit more complex than that. Tech lenses aren't a great way to view geopolitics.
The US' international economic dominance is predicated on a (1) pronounced lead in certain industries and (2) a simply massive economy, which combine to (3) let the US set the rules of international "fair play." The US is where you find the thing you want to buy, and the people you want to sell to. You want access? Play by our rules - everywhere.
Tik Tok does not just threaten US data. It threatens our lead in a critical industry (1), and comes from a country that minimizes the impact of US economic might (2), meaning that China can set their own rules of "fair play" (3). Banning Tik Tok isn't to protect US data; that's totally missing the point. It's to protect the American ability to set international norms.
From that lens, this is certainly hamfisted, and I certainly don't believe views it like this, but you can damn well bet the policy nerd drafting this EO is thinking this way.
There was an old Soviet joke that "the USA meddles in the USSR's internal affairs all over the globe"... and yeah, the "policy nerds" apparently do honestly believe that the whole world is in the US's jurisdiction, but what can you realistically do?
If that is so then the whole discourse borders on the US government deceiving the American people by stating that TikTok is some data security threat.. whereas real reasons seems to be geo-politics..
You;'re right, but I think you're seeing China finally being taken seriously for the future and with that comes and expectation of reciprocity of commerce. If you want to fight to be the most important economy/culture you no longer can ask up to bring a knife to a gun fight.
Well if the current state is zero due process in China, and no ability for US companies to participate in their social media market, then yes their companies should have equal treatment.
I don't agree with this just on fiat from Trump, but the USA is in its rights to give Chinese the same sort of treatment that they give the USA. If you don't play by China's rules you can't be in their market, and those rules are set up to benefit China only.
In this case TikTok is getting the same treatment US tech giants have. If that is not "fair play" I don't know what is.
You can’t have a fair playing field with China unless they also have a fair playing field with the US. That has not ever been the case. China wants to have cake and eat cake.
Not the point. OP is talking about playing field between companies not countries.
He's saying "TikTok should not gather invasive data ... neither should US-based company".
If you oppose that, then you're basically saying "the US wants to have cake and eat it too". I guess every country for itself "works"... for a certain definition of "works".
Let's avoid regression to Chinese standard please.
Am quite surprised and quite honestly shocked that it took this long for US or any country to recognize this fact.
It's not just a fair playing field war between US and China, but between China and rest of the world. Even India, whose companies are not allowed to operate in China under fair play rules banned TikTok only after the Chinese incursion across the LOC.
Most US firms can do business in China. Like Tesla, who even gets preferential treatment that were envied by anyone who ever did business in China (foreigner or not).
They just relinquish certain strong hold to a sovereign nation, like they have to host their data center inside China (both politically important, and economically beneficial). And they also risk their data being stolen (or so they claim).
You missing an important point here, compliance with local laws. US companies CAN do business in China, only if they comply with Chinese laws. Whether these laws are just or unjust is beyond discussion of this thread, what matters is if you want to business in China, you have comply to it.
Imagine, if a Chinese company wants to operate in US but refuse to comply local regulations, what will happen to that company?
Fb, Google and others are banned from China because they refuse to cooperate. What about Tiktok?
Well you can’t assume a fair playing field between USA and any other country, let alone a developing one. They needed protectionist measures to be able to industrialize as well as they did.
Ah interesting, I think I remember Congress asking the tech CEOs if China stole data from the us shortly before the tik tok announcement, I wonder if there's a connection there.
But we use a ton of Chinese tech software and hardware outside of Tiktok, are they gonna ban them all?
A lost of Chinese hardware today doesn't send data back to China. An exception to that are mobile phones for some of which it has been proven to send data to China.
That is not the problem. I'm not a US citizen, but let's pretend I am; as a normal citizen (ie, not a politician or high profile important person) would I be more concerned about my personal data being sent to a foreign country who doesn't know me, my family, my job, and very likely will never give a damn about what i think, or rather my own government who has all interests to know what I think, especially during protests?
I have zero trust in Chinese government, but if I had to choose, even as the European citizen I am (not high profile, not employed in critical areas etc.), I'd rather send my data to China than to my own government.
Exactly, I'd be much more concerned about my personal data going to a government that has agency over me than the one that doesn't. The only time I'd have to worry about Chinese government having my data would be if I went to China. On the other hand, as a US citizen I could be dragged into an unmarked van by DHS goons any time based on the data US government collects on me.
China doesn't care about you because you're not a good target, you want to know who is a good Target? Chinese people living in your country, they can be blackmailed into doing things against the interests of your government.
For a moment think: your data goes to China. China learns over the years about you, including something that can be used against you. At some point in future you are in a position at a company or have a government position where China has an interest in you, at that time it can use the data collected over the years to compromise you.
If you think that will never be the case, let’s go further, what about your spouse or even further your kids when they grow up.
You have a valid point. One's own government is almost always more of a threat that another country's government.
But I think it's possible you aren't thinking of all the contingencies that are created by a foreign government having info about people in this country.
Have you met the American legislative process? This is the same country that when, for example, faced with stiff competition in the motorcycle market from Japanese manufacturers in the 1980s didn't start producing better and cheaper bikes, but instead just added a huge tariff on imported bikes over 700cc in order to boost Harley up. Why would this be any different?
Besides, this move isn't coming from the actual concern for citizens' and residents' privacy. It comes from the idea that economy and pandemic and terrible polling numbers for Trump mean he needs a distraction, as per his usual pattern. It was TikTok but it could have been catalytic converters or grandmothers or anything, just to get people talking about something else.
Is this not a freedom of speech issue? The right is guaranteed for foreingners in the US as well.
If they can ban tik tok, they can ban signal or briar because those also might send your encrypted data overseas or because their use among "violent" protestors is a risk. How about VPN apps that siphon your personal data to china and russia! Haha
Here's the thing, US bigtech complies (in secret) with US intel community just like tik tok complies with CCP's MSS. Matter of fact, I happen to know with certainty and with first hand accounts that the US intel community offensively uses american made apps and services to spy against naturalized law abiding americans on american soil just as they would with a foreigner working for the CCP in China.
You might say, China bans US media companies so US should as well. And I will say to you that's absolute nonsense. China is a totalitarian orwelian nightmare state and the US is supposed to be a beacon of liberty and freedom in the world. The US can ban tiktok's usage amongst US government and military and anyone that does business with them. But by what right do they get to restrict communication, an unregulated non-financial interaction between americans and anyone else?
If americans want to be spied on by China in exchange for being able to use tiktok it's their right and this activity is beyond the reaches of any elected government. Even if there is a law allowing congress or the president to ban tiktok, this law is overriden by the bill of rights that restricts the government from making laws that constrain speech and communication between citizens and anyone,and that guarantees tiktok due process and a trial before being found of any wrongdoing. Congress can however restrict commerce, as in financial transaction and for profit activity with tiktok and advertisers, what congress or trump have no authority to do is to tell americans and tiktok they cannot communicate with each other. Freedom of speech is meaningless if no one is allowed to listen to you.
This needs to be done right. Do not throw away your rights by creating a precedent set by the supreme court that lets government restrict your speech. These sneaky bastards will always worm their way into slowly taking away rights from the people in order to preserve their social order.
I don't like tiktok and if you care to go back far enough into my posting history you will see how much I hate the CCP.
What is given can be taken away (if your right to communicate with a foreign entity is given by the government). And if they can ban one app,banning others is a matter of legal mental gymnastics.
The US President is granted wide-ranging authority to regulate international commerce
The executive order doesn't outright ban the use of TikTok (the app), it just places a ban on "any transactions subject to the jurisdiction of the United States with ByteDance", which in essence makes it impossible for people to find the app on an App store. It's almost identical to the Huawei/ZTE executive orders. It's a bit like an economic sanction on a country, which may also include companies that engage in media/speech.
Non-commercial transactions of information can't be regulated. US advertisers can be banned from doing business with tiktok but it is a free app. If someone in China called you and read out loud every byte in the tiktok app and you wrote it down in notepad and saved it,is that speech or commerce? It is speech in my opinion. They can regulate commerce but for software and crypto they can't regulate the transfer of information,they can only regulate commercial activity with that information. Commerce such as huawei/zte physical equipment sales is dfferent than software. They can't ban software just like how they can't ban a book. They can ban book sales or a book reading service but storage, avaipability and free transfer of information cannot be banned.
They can't ban someone from mailing you the communist manifesto for free as a book or handwritten letter, so they can't ban a communist manifesto app download or punish anyone for facilitating that transfer.
'If americans want to be spied on by China in exchange for being able to use tiktok it's their right'
I think you're argument breaks down here. I don't think that handimf over information to a foreign government is a right. I was unable to Google for a definitive answer, but maybe a more knowledgeable person could chime in. The US already has export restrictions on knowledge ( for example encryption ) to foreign governments.
>The US already has export restrictions on knowledge ( for example encryption ) to foreign governments.
And normally people on this site deride such things as ridiculous (and actively worked around bans on exporting encryption), but when they find out Big Bad China might see their dance videos and lip synching suddenly they're happy to crush the free exchange of information.
Encryption is seen as a tool and a weapon,not as speech. You have the right to choose who you communicate with. Handing over your information to a foreign government,even an enemy state at war is your right. What you don't have a right to do is to share confidential information or information that is not about yourself that will aid a foreign power. The key here is that the information id about you and no one else, this information belongs to you and you have a right to communicate with foreign entities (freedom of speech does not constrain you to speak only to citizens in america). Freedom of speech applies because you are on US soil, not because tiktok is or isn't. On that same note, you get to tell foreign governments about your experience in the US, if you are persecuted or in fear for your life and your government can't protect you (to seek asylum for example). So I'd say communication with foreign countries and governments about unpriviledged information and first hand accounts is a right. Unless of course you live in china or korea in which case you can't make your government look bad or share information about internal conditions (such as starving population).
I'd like to see a similar approach to what happened with tobacco: test apps for spyware, put warning labels in big letters (or simple icons) right up front, teach kids about the dangers in school, but ultimately let everyone decide what they do.
Of course, just as with tobacco there are huge American companies which are going to oppose this sort of transparency. And of course rolling out teaching standards requires that some standardization for app privacy exist in the first place, so I don't expect this to happen fast (if it could ever happen at all).
If a publisher violates a tax law, it can be shut down without worrying about free speech issues. Same with a phone company or church in violation of federal laws (although large lawsuits are a given). Tiktok is not being shut down for its own speech, but for being an agent of foreign espionage and foreign contributions to political candidates (essentially). Thus the first ammendment issue is moot.
Signal isn't sponsored by foreign governments, so it is immune to this sort of attack. It looks like Briar has German funding. The encrypted and decentralized nature of both of those apps makes them much lower concerns for espionage and (election) interference, and of course neither provides content directly from foreign governments, so they cannot be called into question for campaign interference.
That is regulation of commerce. A publisher exchanging books for detailed account of everything you do cannot be prevented from doing so. If they violate tax law their business license and finances maybe jeopardized but their right to exchange information is not.
Signal and Briar were examples. Ok, telegram, it's russian so should it be banned? Espionage has to di with state and national secrets. A foreign government spying on americans with their knowledge and consent is not espionage. How is facebook literally recording without consent not a bigger issue? Please ban facebook before tiktok. Google and Amazon have home assistants spying on americans which is magnitudes of order worse thab tiktok!
This is the thing you have to undetstand, bytedance (tiktok's creator) being cozy with ccp is not a whole lot different than facebook and zuckergerg being in bed with the trump admin or Google being in bed with obama admin ,except China is an ocean many nukes away from doing actual harm to americans and your own government is literally facilitating the death of your own citizens as we speak! Ban facebook,google and amazon because they are helping tear apart america while you're at it!
This is pure politics, sacrificing your right in fear of a boogeyman in China because the boogeyman here is on your side. You don't get to do that, if you disagree with the bill of rights have a constitutional convention and change it.
I get to to communicate with tiktok or even the chinese government if I want. And if I share my private life with them that's my right too. The government has no authority to prevent free excercise of my rights even if they don't like it.
Right now and in 2016 facebook was used to manipulate elections in the US. Shut it down because thay clearly is a national security risk if you truly believe the government policing what private information you share or consume is a good idea.
I'm far from understanding the legal complexity, but one analogy I consider here is what it'd be like to ban a particular brand or country of origin of pens, or cellphones, or routers.
Those things are definitely used for speech, and banning them all would likely be an issue. But banning a brand of pens because you don't trust the chemicals in them as safe or routers because you're concerned about potential spy ware, seems reasonable.
In that sense, TikTok is just one of many alternatives and if the motivation isn't to regulate speech, it feels like it could fit with other bans that seem reasonable to me.
I'd assume the claim here would be that it presents national security risk, though of course I think that's probably not why the ban is really happening, and it makes sense for it to be challenged.
> I'd assume the claim here would be that it presents national security risk, though of course I think that's probably not why the ban is really happening, and it makes sense for it to be challenged.
Yeah, but they lack the authority. National security does not override anyone's rights. They don't get to do this regardless if their intent. This sets a precedent where if they can claim any entity is a national security risk they can restrict communication with that entitiy. Totalitarian regimes do this exact thing when they ban certain social media or VPNs!
It's diffrent from banning a brand of pens because you're banning commercial activity and the danger is a chemical not speech. Here you're sayiny speech itself is too dangerous to be allowed. A clear line preventing the government from doing this for a reason.
>. But banning a brand of pens because you don't trust the chemicals in them as safe or routers because you're concerned about potential spy ware, seems reasonable.
Banning the pen is legitimate as knowingly harming people is a crime.
Banning the router isn't the same. At most they are guilty of false advertising, and even that can probably be made legal in the license provided. Besides, I may have reasons to want a router with spyware on it.
The same would apply to TikTok, but I think they're trying to say it's also "aiding our enemies" making it akin to a light form of treason.
a company is not a natural citizen and as such, amendments do not extend to those. amendments are the bare minimum guarantee you as a person are given by the country of your residence or citizenship.
>>If americans want to be spied on by China in exchange for being able to use tiktok it's their right and this activity is beyond the reaches of any elected government.
You lost me here. That spying can have disastrous results for security and economic well-being of USA (daughter of top Intel engineer or President's top adviser for example is wiretapped by CCP) so the state has extremely legitimate reasons to watch out for the best of all. Our Congress and our courts decide if the President overstepped the line, not China.
The clock is tiking....tik-tok will get due process, meaning lawyers will be able to represent them and that's it. Maybe the whole case will be sealed and the judge can hear classified info privately.
The security and economic well being of the US comes after the citizens' rights are secured. A government that provides security and economic prosperity by sacrificing rights and liberties of citizens does not have the consent of the governed and is operating with illegitimate authority.
Your courts and congress will decide if he stepped over the line. But if they fail to do so, you lose a ton of rights. He then gets to ban "antifa" apps and democrats get to ban "alt right" russian apps. A supreme court precedent can't be challenged in court when they apply the same logic for something else. This isn't about tik tok, this is about every other app the US government can't controp or arm twist because they are not based on the US.
Will a chinese company really comply with the US court system in terms of discovery? I would question if they are going to comply with discovery in a way that a US company might. What exactly is forcing them to hand over actual documentation and not just forgeries? Will the Chinese court system get them in trouble for that? I doubt it.
After all many publically traded chinese companies in the US aren't actually compliant with the same laws as US companies are.
I might be missing something, but I don't see the relevance of discovery when TikTok is suing the US government. The government will need to establish that it followed due process in drafting and executing the executive order. I can't see what relevant information TikTok would hold about that? Posisbly they would have correspondence between the government and themselves, but you would expect the government to have copies of that too. It may be that the order was carried out because of TikTok's behaviour, but that would need to be behaviour that the government has documentation of, so it wouldn't come through discovery.
Also, just to be clear, this law suit isn't going to be litigated by Chinese lawyers, the lawyers are going to be US lawyers who have to adhere to the US standards. If they think that TikTok is failing to provide something to the court or are acting unethically they are obligated to tell the court of be disbared.
DoJ could ask ByteDance for information about TikTok US data security. It's a no brainer to see why DoJ proving this issue would be hard if the laws were stringent, but it doesn't seem like his entity list (if that's what he's using) power has any restrictions on Chinese foreign commerce - historically it's been interpreted as very broad, so as far as SCOTUS will let him.
I don't get why he decided to ban tik tok and tencent and I'm not the biggest fan of his by any stretch of the imagination, but if America wants to ban 1 Chinese app, why is that an issue? They literally copied silicon valley businesses for decades in China.
The problem I have with this though, is that it's not a way to get protect American interests, it's probably the first in a series of last ditch efforts to portray a certain political stance before the campaign. And the effect of banning wechat, tik tok, and tencent will stoke an already considerable flame of anti chinese perspective, which the chinese americans on our soil, have to suffer for. I say ban the crap out of all Chinese apps if that's just what it is, but let's all make sure not to throw out our own under the bus with it.
Because permitting banning apps without due process is a dangerous precedent. Next up will be Signal because you could use it to talk to dangerous foreign nationals, or VPN apps because you could send secret data to the evil-state-du-jour. Process matters, even if this particular app doesn't.
> At the same time, how can a single person decide the fate of a company in a different country?
The single person was explicitly elected to speak and act on America’s behalf. The same single person is the commander in chief for America’s military, giving them quite a bit of power when interacting with foreign countries.
And they’re impacting a foreign company’s operations in the US, something which seems to fall within the powers granted to them.
In general, I don’t like what he’s doing, but the why and how in this case appear to be by the book.
> Why is congress not involved if it's so important?
Congress creates laws. The President enforces them. This is an enforcement action--it's not unusual for Congress to be uninvolved.
> Should the president really have this power?
Multiple Congresses gave these powers to the President [1][2][3]. The current and next ones are free to take them back.
My personal belief is no, the President shouldn't have this power in the absence of clear and present danger. We need a commission, likely under Commerce and/or State, that assesses civil fines and passes prosecution recommendations to the DoJ. Furthermore, we need legislation describing (a) which countries are deemed economically friendly and economically adversarial, (b) how those determinations are made and (c) what companies from those countries can and cannot do as well as (d) how they may achieve "safe harbor" status (e.g. by locally hosting data and submitting code for periodic review).
IMHO TikTok being owned by the CCP now is a clear and present danger to all Americans using the app.
You make some fair points, but there is no way that I would trust a government agency to actually do code reviews and verify that a company isn't doing something wrong.
I feel increasingly unsafe because this app is being operated by a company that is beyond extradition with the USA. So if they ARE busted for doing bad stuff, who is getting jailed?
In an era where every snapdragon SoC seems rootable from any old application, and you can use machine learning to pick out key words from text streams, do we really need this app in the market?
Constitution and constitutional precedent also imbues the powers of foreign affairs onto the president unless there's legislation. Jefferson pushed for this to be the case: "The transaction of business with foreign nations is executive altogether. It belongs, then, to the head of that department, except as to such portions of it as are specially submitted to the Senate. Exceptions are to be construed strictly"
Banning foreign entities with executive orders? Yes, the president should. Also, this country was started by throwing British tea into the Boston harbor so it's really nothing new. Obama confiscated property from Iranians, banned certain transactions with Libya, North Korea, Syria, and others. Probably every president has issued similar EOs at some point or another. Only difference this time is that TikTok is popular. I suppose we never really lamented the loss of Soviet Saturday morning cartoons.
"(a) Any authority granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may be exercised to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the President declares a national emergency with respect to such threat."
USA has given its President a lot more power over the years and decades.
This will be an unpopular opinion no doubt but the question isn't "should the president have this power?" It is actually "should this president have this power?" The answer to the second one is more challenging since he doesn't respect the norms of political restraint.
Well, the executive branch has a lot of leeway when it comes to anything at the border and beyond : eg, working with other countries such as treaties, international commerce, tariff, or war.
Further, Trump's anti-China campaign has broad political support from both parties - Congress voted to ban TikTok in federal devices just days ago.
> If Congress believes the president has used the emergency economic powers unjustly, lawmakers can overrule the order by passing a resolution that would terminate the order.
> But any pushback from Congress is unlikely, as the skepticism about the Chinese Communist Party's potential ties to the country's technology companies has gathered bipartisan support.
It's not like congress will strike down the order because it's unjustly and then propose some new legislation which bans TikTok, it's good for everyone there to be able to blame Trump even if it has bipartisan backing.
Yes. It is no surprise that they sue, but maybe that was a mistake. Because depending on the result, it might get TikTok banned in the EU as well.
Or the result is that indeed their operation is 100% independent of their Chinese parent company and no US data ever touches mainland China... which would surprise me.
Honest question: would it matter if they stored data in mainland china? Wouldn't it still be fine if they are storing data there but not giving it to china gov? (Not that i really believe that any data in china is safe from gov, although i could say the same about usa, but what is the actual bar that the us gov has to meet to show its a national security risk? Is data on china soil sufficient?)
Readit News
Due process is a bedrock of American law. It means government officials can't just "do what they want" and make arbitrary decisions with specific targets -- which is exactly what the TikTok ban is.
You want to ban TikTok? Great, you need a specific law from Congress that outlines under what circumstances companies may be banned in the US, and then prove the specific company meets those standards.
None of that has been done here. The president is not a dictator. TikTok should absolutely sue.
Note: this is regardless of anything TikTok has actually done privacy- or security-wise. The point isn't whether they're dangerous, the point is whether we can meet some standard of showing that they're dangerous. If they're dangerous, we need to establish how and why legally. This is what separates the rule of law from dictatorship.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process
What matters is the way it's banned. And why. And the current process feels every bit as wrong as TikTok itself.
What the US needs is proper data protection laws. And then it should enforce those laws equally against US and foreign companies. Just arbitrarily banning one thing because you realise that what you always allowed for US companies, is suddenly a problem when it's a Chinese company, is absolutely wrong.
Please provide a source.
Also how is this different than Twitter that was getting a list of all installed apps until Apple tightened down on the method they used and everything that FB and Google does.
Congress can hardly control the three letter agencies violating amercian rights on a massive scale or blatantly lie under oath in testimony
Don’t think a foreign company is going to allowed to actually proceed with a suit involving national security as the administration is going ton claim
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tiktok-cfius-exclusive/ex...
There is a specific law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which specifies when and how a president can ban economic exchanges with foreign entities. I think you will be disappointed to find out that under this law there is no real due process required. The president only needs to declare a national emergency in regards to the ban and then send a report to Congress detailing why the declaration and ban are justified. If Congress disagrees it is justified they can pass a resolution overriding the ban.
Now, due process has to start focusing on increasing the federal structure of state’s power and the power that comes with their senators / house / etc.
A) Foreign owned companies are subject to all sorts of other criteria and trade rules.
B) The issue cited is 'national security' in which case there is a wide latitude for tolerance.
'Suing the government' is not 'good' - it's a canard.
What Congress needs to do is ban all Chinese companies and activities wherein US companies of the same kind are not allowed to operate in China.
That China won't allow social networks there, but the US allows them here is bonkers ridiculous.
It would be like Canada saying 'We're banning aluminium imports, but demand that we can export to the US'.
All of this before 'security' even enters the equation.
The US' international economic dominance is predicated on a (1) pronounced lead in certain industries and (2) a simply massive economy, which combine to (3) let the US set the rules of international "fair play." The US is where you find the thing you want to buy, and the people you want to sell to. You want access? Play by our rules - everywhere.
Tik Tok does not just threaten US data. It threatens our lead in a critical industry (1), and comes from a country that minimizes the impact of US economic might (2), meaning that China can set their own rules of "fair play" (3). Banning Tik Tok isn't to protect US data; that's totally missing the point. It's to protect the American ability to set international norms.
From that lens, this is certainly hamfisted, and I certainly don't believe views it like this, but you can damn well bet the policy nerd drafting this EO is thinking this way.
I don't agree with this just on fiat from Trump, but the USA is in its rights to give Chinese the same sort of treatment that they give the USA. If you don't play by China's rules you can't be in their market, and those rules are set up to benefit China only.
In this case TikTok is getting the same treatment US tech giants have. If that is not "fair play" I don't know what is.
https://www.businessinsider.com/nba-china-feud-timeline-dary...
He's saying "TikTok should not gather invasive data ... neither should US-based company".
If you oppose that, then you're basically saying "the US wants to have cake and eat it too". I guess every country for itself "works"... for a certain definition of "works".
Let's avoid regression to Chinese standard please.
It's not just a fair playing field war between US and China, but between China and rest of the world. Even India, whose companies are not allowed to operate in China under fair play rules banned TikTok only after the Chinese incursion across the LOC.
I really don't know what to make of this.
It’s why Microsoft and Apple are available in China.
They just relinquish certain strong hold to a sovereign nation, like they have to host their data center inside China (both politically important, and economically beneficial). And they also risk their data being stolen (or so they claim).
Imagine, if a Chinese company wants to operate in US but refuse to comply local regulations, what will happen to that company?
Fb, Google and others are banned from China because they refuse to cooperate. What about Tiktok?
But we use a ton of Chinese tech software and hardware outside of Tiktok, are they gonna ban them all?
For a moment think: your data goes to China. China learns over the years about you, including something that can be used against you. At some point in future you are in a position at a company or have a government position where China has an interest in you, at that time it can use the data collected over the years to compromise you.
If you think that will never be the case, let’s go further, what about your spouse or even further your kids when they grow up.
Governments play the long game.
But I think it's possible you aren't thinking of all the contingencies that are created by a foreign government having info about people in this country.
No, because that isn't the solution to the problem being addressed. The administration doesn't want to protect privacy. It wants to ban TikTok.
Besides, this move isn't coming from the actual concern for citizens' and residents' privacy. It comes from the idea that economy and pandemic and terrible polling numbers for Trump mean he needs a distraction, as per his usual pattern. It was TikTok but it could have been catalytic converters or grandmothers or anything, just to get people talking about something else.
Dead Comment
If they can ban tik tok, they can ban signal or briar because those also might send your encrypted data overseas or because their use among "violent" protestors is a risk. How about VPN apps that siphon your personal data to china and russia! Haha
Here's the thing, US bigtech complies (in secret) with US intel community just like tik tok complies with CCP's MSS. Matter of fact, I happen to know with certainty and with first hand accounts that the US intel community offensively uses american made apps and services to spy against naturalized law abiding americans on american soil just as they would with a foreigner working for the CCP in China.
You might say, China bans US media companies so US should as well. And I will say to you that's absolute nonsense. China is a totalitarian orwelian nightmare state and the US is supposed to be a beacon of liberty and freedom in the world. The US can ban tiktok's usage amongst US government and military and anyone that does business with them. But by what right do they get to restrict communication, an unregulated non-financial interaction between americans and anyone else?
If americans want to be spied on by China in exchange for being able to use tiktok it's their right and this activity is beyond the reaches of any elected government. Even if there is a law allowing congress or the president to ban tiktok, this law is overriden by the bill of rights that restricts the government from making laws that constrain speech and communication between citizens and anyone,and that guarantees tiktok due process and a trial before being found of any wrongdoing. Congress can however restrict commerce, as in financial transaction and for profit activity with tiktok and advertisers, what congress or trump have no authority to do is to tell americans and tiktok they cannot communicate with each other. Freedom of speech is meaningless if no one is allowed to listen to you.
This needs to be done right. Do not throw away your rights by creating a precedent set by the supreme court that lets government restrict your speech. These sneaky bastards will always worm their way into slowly taking away rights from the people in order to preserve their social order.
I don't like tiktok and if you care to go back far enough into my posting history you will see how much I hate the CCP.
What is given can be taken away (if your right to communicate with a foreign entity is given by the government). And if they can ban one app,banning others is a matter of legal mental gymnastics.
The executive order doesn't outright ban the use of TikTok (the app), it just places a ban on "any transactions subject to the jurisdiction of the United States with ByteDance", which in essence makes it impossible for people to find the app on an App store. It's almost identical to the Huawei/ZTE executive orders. It's a bit like an economic sanction on a country, which may also include companies that engage in media/speech.
They can't ban someone from mailing you the communist manifesto for free as a book or handwritten letter, so they can't ban a communist manifesto app download or punish anyone for facilitating that transfer.
I think you're argument breaks down here. I don't think that handimf over information to a foreign government is a right. I was unable to Google for a definitive answer, but maybe a more knowledgeable person could chime in. The US already has export restrictions on knowledge ( for example encryption ) to foreign governments.
And normally people on this site deride such things as ridiculous (and actively worked around bans on exporting encryption), but when they find out Big Bad China might see their dance videos and lip synching suddenly they're happy to crush the free exchange of information.
Of course, just as with tobacco there are huge American companies which are going to oppose this sort of transparency. And of course rolling out teaching standards requires that some standardization for app privacy exist in the first place, so I don't expect this to happen fast (if it could ever happen at all).
Deleted Comment
Signal isn't sponsored by foreign governments, so it is immune to this sort of attack. It looks like Briar has German funding. The encrypted and decentralized nature of both of those apps makes them much lower concerns for espionage and (election) interference, and of course neither provides content directly from foreign governments, so they cannot be called into question for campaign interference.
Signal and Briar were examples. Ok, telegram, it's russian so should it be banned? Espionage has to di with state and national secrets. A foreign government spying on americans with their knowledge and consent is not espionage. How is facebook literally recording without consent not a bigger issue? Please ban facebook before tiktok. Google and Amazon have home assistants spying on americans which is magnitudes of order worse thab tiktok!
This is the thing you have to undetstand, bytedance (tiktok's creator) being cozy with ccp is not a whole lot different than facebook and zuckergerg being in bed with the trump admin or Google being in bed with obama admin ,except China is an ocean many nukes away from doing actual harm to americans and your own government is literally facilitating the death of your own citizens as we speak! Ban facebook,google and amazon because they are helping tear apart america while you're at it!
This is pure politics, sacrificing your right in fear of a boogeyman in China because the boogeyman here is on your side. You don't get to do that, if you disagree with the bill of rights have a constitutional convention and change it.
I get to to communicate with tiktok or even the chinese government if I want. And if I share my private life with them that's my right too. The government has no authority to prevent free excercise of my rights even if they don't like it.
Right now and in 2016 facebook was used to manipulate elections in the US. Shut it down because thay clearly is a national security risk if you truly believe the government policing what private information you share or consume is a good idea.
Those things are definitely used for speech, and banning them all would likely be an issue. But banning a brand of pens because you don't trust the chemicals in them as safe or routers because you're concerned about potential spy ware, seems reasonable.
In that sense, TikTok is just one of many alternatives and if the motivation isn't to regulate speech, it feels like it could fit with other bans that seem reasonable to me.
I'd assume the claim here would be that it presents national security risk, though of course I think that's probably not why the ban is really happening, and it makes sense for it to be challenged.
Yeah, but they lack the authority. National security does not override anyone's rights. They don't get to do this regardless if their intent. This sets a precedent where if they can claim any entity is a national security risk they can restrict communication with that entitiy. Totalitarian regimes do this exact thing when they ban certain social media or VPNs!
It's diffrent from banning a brand of pens because you're banning commercial activity and the danger is a chemical not speech. Here you're sayiny speech itself is too dangerous to be allowed. A clear line preventing the government from doing this for a reason.
Banning the pen is legitimate as knowingly harming people is a crime.
Banning the router isn't the same. At most they are guilty of false advertising, and even that can probably be made legal in the license provided. Besides, I may have reasons to want a router with spyware on it.
The same would apply to TikTok, but I think they're trying to say it's also "aiding our enemies" making it akin to a light form of treason.
It looks like the USA don't like a social network they can't control the algorithm.
Do you also think you have a right to not wear a mask during a pandemic or not wear a seatbelt while driving?
This is simple exchange of unprivileged information between an individual and an organization (foreign or domestic).
You lost me here. That spying can have disastrous results for security and economic well-being of USA (daughter of top Intel engineer or President's top adviser for example is wiretapped by CCP) so the state has extremely legitimate reasons to watch out for the best of all. Our Congress and our courts decide if the President overstepped the line, not China.
The clock is tiking....tik-tok will get due process, meaning lawyers will be able to represent them and that's it. Maybe the whole case will be sealed and the judge can hear classified info privately.
Your courts and congress will decide if he stepped over the line. But if they fail to do so, you lose a ton of rights. He then gets to ban "antifa" apps and democrats get to ban "alt right" russian apps. A supreme court precedent can't be challenged in court when they apply the same logic for something else. This isn't about tik tok, this is about every other app the US government can't controp or arm twist because they are not based on the US.
After all many publically traded chinese companies in the US aren't actually compliant with the same laws as US companies are.
Also, just to be clear, this law suit isn't going to be litigated by Chinese lawyers, the lawyers are going to be US lawyers who have to adhere to the US standards. If they think that TikTok is failing to provide something to the court or are acting unethically they are obligated to tell the court of be disbared.
What happened to the presumption of innocence?
The problem I have with this though, is that it's not a way to get protect American interests, it's probably the first in a series of last ditch efforts to portray a certain political stance before the campaign. And the effect of banning wechat, tik tok, and tencent will stoke an already considerable flame of anti chinese perspective, which the chinese americans on our soil, have to suffer for. I say ban the crap out of all Chinese apps if that's just what it is, but let's all make sure not to throw out our own under the bus with it.
I don't like this company, which has already started censoring foreign nationals based on what CCP allows.
At the same time, how can a single person decide the fate of a company in a different country? What will be next?
Furthermore, what if EU decides Instagram is somehow a threat and must be shut down?
How is TikTok's fate being decided by a US ban? The CCP does this all the time, it isn't uncommon to ban foreign software.
Deleted Comment
The single person was explicitly elected to speak and act on America’s behalf. The same single person is the commander in chief for America’s military, giving them quite a bit of power when interacting with foreign countries.
And they’re impacting a foreign company’s operations in the US, something which seems to fall within the powers granted to them.
In general, I don’t like what he’s doing, but the why and how in this case appear to be by the book.
Congress creates laws. The President enforces them. This is an enforcement action--it's not unusual for Congress to be uninvolved.
> Should the president really have this power?
Multiple Congresses gave these powers to the President [1][2][3]. The current and next ones are free to take them back.
My personal belief is no, the President shouldn't have this power in the absence of clear and present danger. We need a commission, likely under Commerce and/or State, that assesses civil fines and passes prosecution recommendations to the DoJ. Furthermore, we need legislation describing (a) which countries are deemed economically friendly and economically adversarial, (b) how those determinations are made and (c) what companies from those countries can and cannot do as well as (d) how they may achieve "safe harbor" status (e.g. by locally hosting data and submitting code for periodic review).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Emergency_Econom...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exon–Florio_Amendment
[3] https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/international/Docum...
You make some fair points, but there is no way that I would trust a government agency to actually do code reviews and verify that a company isn't doing something wrong.
I feel increasingly unsafe because this app is being operated by a company that is beyond extradition with the USA. So if they ARE busted for doing bad stuff, who is getting jailed?
In an era where every snapdragon SoC seems rootable from any old application, and you can use machine learning to pick out key words from text streams, do we really need this app in the market?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_executive_actions_by...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1701
"(a) Any authority granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may be exercised to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the President declares a national emergency with respect to such threat."
USA has given its President a lot more power over the years and decades.
He once again imposed tariffs on Canada using the whole "national security" excuse. It seems like he can do quite a lot using that excuse...
No.
Further, Trump's anti-China campaign has broad political support from both parties - Congress voted to ban TikTok in federal devices just days ago.
> But any pushback from Congress is unlikely, as the skepticism about the Chinese Communist Party's potential ties to the country's technology companies has gathered bipartisan support.
Or the result is that indeed their operation is 100% independent of their Chinese parent company and no US data ever touches mainland China... which would surprise me.
Deleted Comment