TikTok Ban — ByteDance Sues US to Kill Bill – Source: securityboulevard.com

Supreme Court “likely” to rule whether new law is constitutional—or even practical.

PAFACA SueTok

What’s the craic? The Gray Lady’s Sapna Maheshwari and David McCabe report: TikTok Sues U.S. Government Over Law Forcing Sale or Ban

“Simply not possible”

The social media company and its Chinese parent [are] stoking a battle over national security and free speech that is likely to end up in the Supreme Court. … TikTok pointed to the billions of dollars it has already spent to address potential security risks, … an effort known as Project Texas, as well as a draft 90-page national security agreement that made “extraordinary” commitments to the U.S. government.

…

TikTok said … National security concerns … are “speculative” and fall short of what’s required to justify violating First Amendment rights: … The law violated the First Amendment by effectively removing an app that millions of Americans use to … communicate freely. It also argued that a divestiture was “simply not possible.”

Remind me? The Pink’Un’s Hannah Murphy fills us in: TikTok challenges ‘extreme’ US divest-or-ban bill

“Donald Trump”

Last month, Washington passed legislation requiring TikTok to divest from its parent by January 19 2025 or face a countrywide ban, citing concerns that the Chinese Communist party could wield data on the app’s 170 [million] US users for espionage purposes, or proliferate propaganda. … Congress moved with unusual speed to pass the TikTok legislation, particularly after its members received classified briefings from security officials raising national security concerns. The bill passed despite aggressive lobbying efforts by TikTok, which galvanised its own users.

…

TikTok said in the petition [that] the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States … had stopped meaningfully engaging with the platform in August 2022, while “Congress tossed this tailored agreement aside, in favour of the politically expedient and punitive approach.” … TikTok successfully sued the US government in 2020 when then-president Donald Trump issued an executive order to ban the app.

Who’s right? Aurich sounds conflicted:

I think you can have deep issues with TikTok, social media, and China, and still feel like you don’t like the approach the US is taking. … I’m deeply uncomfortable with the implications of this. A lot of the defense seems to be “but China,” but government effectively silencing foreign media can have some real ugly sides. I’m thinking about Israel and Al Jazeera.

…

If this is about data, then why are we not passing strong data protection laws? … Frankly, Elon Musk … and Mark Zuckerburg having our data—and everyone they’re selling our data to—is Pretty Bad, too.

Ah, the mythical U.S. GDPR. This Anonymous Coward sounds slightly cynical:

That would just be going too far! You’d never get consumer protection in the USA!

Could we please have an “unconstitutional slippery slope” argument? impossiblefork fears tyranny:

I really can’t see how one could not decide in favour of TikTok. It’d have to be the strangest judgement in the world.

…

[The bill] is, I think, a couple of steps too far. Many allowances are made for security, but I’m not sure this is in fact justified by actual security concerns. … If they actually decide in favour of the government I can’t see how this will not mess up basically all US law. Essentially, if this goes, then anything goes.

However, redmid17 reminds us we’ve been here before:

Yawn. [It’s] not even unprecedented: … The mere suggestion by a senate committee can force a platform sale: Grindr.

…

My advice is to suck it up, buttercup. … Enjoy the billions you’ll bring in from ****ty dancing videos and misinformation so ****ing dumb it makes flat earthers look sane.

Are we in danger of being too parochial? Gran Torino has the view from Asia:

I [am] Singaporean … from the same country as the TikTok CEO. … I completely understand the US decision to require ByteDance to either divest TikTok or leave.

…

Many supposedly “private” entities in China are not truly independent. [President] Xi has also called on state-owned firms to “execute the will of the party.” Draconian legislation in the form of a counter-espionage law and national security law also gives Beijing sweeping control over companies.

…

During the Covid-19 pandemic, social media in Singapore was flooded with disinformation accusing the US of inventing the virus as a bioweapon. These were clearly part of an influence operation. A similar trend of blaming “US aggression” was also observed when the Ukraine War broke out in 2022. More recently, TikTok algorithms seem to be elevating anti-US and anti-Israel content to stir up Singapore’s Malay-Muslim community.

Ālea iacta est. Dioptase explains:

ByteDance messed up when they used the platform to encourage users to contact congress to protest proposed legislation. There is already precedent for preventing foreign ownership of media, theoretically to prevent manipulation of the American public. ByteDance demonstrated it’s not just theory.

Meanwhile, orangecat cuts to the chase:

They’ve lied about storing data in China and spied on journalists. [And] It’s crazy to allow the Chinese Communist Party to have access to loads of personal information about hundreds of millions of Americans.

And Finally:

Don’t try this at home

Previously in And Finally

You have been reading SB Blogwatch by Richi Jennings. Richi curates the best bloggy bits, finest forums, and weirdest websites—so you don’t have to. Hate mail may be directed to @RiCHi, @richij, @[email protected], @richi.bsky.social or [email protected]. Ask your doctor before reading. Your mileage may vary. Past per­formance is no guar­antee of future results. Do not stare into laser with re­maining eye. E&OE. 30.

Image source: Eyestetix Studio (via Unsplash; leveled and cropped)