lautanTikTok sues the US government over ban
đ° đ đ± đ đł đŠ đž đ° đŠ đ” đźWhat would give them standing? Theyâd have to be an entity protected by the constitution to claim that protection was harmed. Is it this (my emphasis)?
TikTok Ltd was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and is based in both Singapore and Los Angeles. source
I guess Iâve never thought about what makes an entity have rights here. Buckingham Palace couldnât just open shop here and start suing our government, right?
Why does US see Chinese-owned TikTok as a security threat?
TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew has endured a nearly six-hour grilling by U.S. lawmakers, some of whom are pushing to ban the popular short-video app nationwide. The lawmakers questioned 40-year-old Singaporean native Chew over data security and harmful content. Despite his assurances that TikTok prioritizes user safety and should not be banned due to its ties to China, some lawmakers responded skeptically. TikTok is a subsidiary of Chinese technology firm ByteDance. It has been closely scrutinized over whether the data it has on 150 million American users is accessible to China's government and if the platform could be used to promote narratives favorable to the countryâs communist leaders.
The constitution applies to the government, not the American (or other) people. âGovernment shall pass no lawâŠâ
Simon MĂŒllerThe case is essentially âhey you kinda passed a bill thatâs against your own constitution? Youâre kinda supposed to follow thatâŠâ
Does the US constitution apply for rights of businesses, or is it just people?
Not being snarky I actually donât know
Important rights of businesses in the US constitution include
Important note regarding a businessâs right to regulate free speech: The rules of the Constitution are meant to regulate Congress, not businesses or citizens. Therefore, the right to free speech means Congress cannot restrict someone from speaking his or her mind, but a business may be able to.
For example, a radio show has the right to not allow a certain person to speak on its program or to say certain things. Ultimately, such issues are decided by the Supreme Court, and there may be some exceptions, depending on the circumstances.
Corporations are people. Thanks to Citizens United. Though Iâd gladly give up TikTok for the court to reverse this decision.
Of course, corporations are people and this is bigotry. Check mate.
List of companies incorporated in the Cayman Islands: capedge.com/company/by/incState/E9/active/true?soâŠ
Mostly obscure to me, but I looked up GlobalFoundries. Originally divested from AMD, bought IBMâs chip business, got a contract from US Department of Defense in 2023 for manufacturing military chips
I imagine you wouldnât object to GlobalFoundries suing the US government
We decided a while ago that the Constitution protects everyone and every thing in the US because the loophole of declaring people and companies to not be protected was too dystopian even for conservatives at the time.
Something important to note here is that there are various exceptions to freedom of speech protections from various time periods, one such exception is Incitement â If a person has the intention of inciting the violations of laws that is imminent and likely, while directing this incitement at a person or groups of persons, their speech will not be protected under the First Amendment. This test was created by the Supreme Court in Brandenburg v. Ohio.
This is relevant because alongside the TikTok forced sale they also passed a law against sending sensitive data including personal details and photographs to adversarial nations including Russia, China, Iran, etc. That means that Incitement could be used to describe TikTok operating in any capacity without completely centralizing to the USA, and therefor they would have no protections by the first amendment.
TikTok blocks all access from Hong Kong. Can I sue them?
Not as a foreign national.
Rikudou_SageAnd not as a Hong-Konger, if you donât want your family on a blacklist.
Read that as family in a basket. Close enough.
Possibly linuxWe put them, in a basket
gasps
@doodle baseball You cannot contact them in this case
vikingWait, Iâm in HK right now for business and can open it just fine from my hotel wifi. The website that is, I donât care about the platform and wouldnât use the app.
I could play videos just fine without login though. Anything Iâm missing?
Good. The ban is censorship dressed up as national security.
TrickDacyTikTok is state sponsored spyware dressed up as fUnNy ViDeOs
And Facebook isnât?
Shit I forgot the us government owns 50% of Facebook
Access to the data itâs what matters, ownership is just one method of access.
If this were true, it wouldnât matter that the US set up the social security number system, because Experian leaked millions of Americansâ SSNs.
It obviously matters who owns a service that millions of citizens use from a country that is a political rival. Youâre just hoping to shut down any conversation against TikTok with a whataboutism
Weâre talking about individualsâ personal data stored by social media companies being accessible to others (governments, in this case). This has nothing to do with social security.
The problem is that the data is accessable, but thatâs not being addressed. This is an improper fix to an actual problem, just facts.
Turns out analogies arenât your strong suit
Itâs a bad analogy. Mass surveillance (continuous collection of everyoneâs data) has very little to do with the number we use to track social security payments.
The ownership part was how it was analogous. That was pretty obvious. Any time a massive system is set up for millions of people to use, it quite obviously matters who set it up and why.
I just love when Internet randos pretend not to get analogies because Iâm, gasp, comparing things which arenât identical.
In any case, sorry to interrupt your stream of 15 second video clips.
Lol
What is the social security system was run by China?
Thatâs your great analogy. This is a social media company. Gtfoh
Iâll get back to you once Iâve taken enough drugs to be on this level
When signing up for a tik-tok account, I put in a birth date, a username, an email address for verifcation and that was it. I didnât need to provide a drivers license, verify that the name I put in was my actual name, that the birth date was my actual birth date. Location isnât allowed nor was it requested and neither was Nearby devices. Itâs actually been a much better behaved application than any American social media app.
So Americans having access to Americanâs Data is bad but you think China having access to Americanâs Data is good?
No, theyâre both bad.
Alright, thank you for clarifying that you want more restrictions and laws against these companies, it just seemed odd for you to bring up those other businesses in a post talking about the TikTok forced sale and resulting lawsuit.
Iâm just happy about them restricting US Citizen data being brokered to adversarial nations including Iran, Russia, China, and others.
I want the issue of mass surveillance / data collection to be addressed, instead of this bs which is basically working around the edges the problem. Tick-tock shouldnât be allowed to sell (/provide) user data to anyone but neither should Meta, X, reddit, etc.
So youâre simultaneously against the TikTok ban but also worried about the lack of privacy for American Citizens?
irreticentI canât tell which of the two of us you are referring to.
It doesnât matter who owns it. Itâs the data that the US government is accessing.
I couldnât give a shit about TikTok, Iâve never used it in my life. I just think the US should be open and say we are banning this as we donât have control over it. Sure China is only doing what we are doing but fuck em. Iâd respect that.
Also, itâs got to be about silencing pro-Palestinian rhetoric too.
If they ban TikTok they should ban FaceBook and Instagram too.
Also, itâs got to be about silencing pro-Palestinian rhetoric too.
Yeah trump was talking about banning it in 2020 because he used his time machine to find out what it would be used for in the future. After his harrowing story from the future, I agreed with the effort to ban it because I lOvE gEnOcIdE
I refuse to converse with someone who conveys themselves in this manner.
Be better dude. Manners cost nothing.
Have a wonderful day!
Whataboutism isnât the elevated level of discourse youâre pretending it to be
Youâre actually just mad you donât have an actual response to the fact that you making the about Israel/Palestine makes zero sense
Neither is using buzzwords my guy.
Anyway leave me alone, youâre rude and obtuse and Iâd rather not converse with you.
No one asked for any of your replies, snowflake
Youâre actually just mad you donât have an actual response to the fact that you making the about Israel/Palestine makes zero sense
They donât need to. Facebook plays ball.
âif one authoritarian government does surveillance even across borders, why canât all? Anything less than âi agreeâ here is hypocrisy!â
Noone is saying that. The argument is pretty much that people want more scrutiny applied to other companies beyond tiktok, and ideally not be under constant surveillance by any of them, not that people want to be monitored by all police states equally.
Itâs a whataboutist cop out. People who like tiktok just wanna point out how supposedly since tiktok was targeted, then itâs all in bad faith and therefore there could never possibly be a legit concern with tiktok in particular. Any argument to be addressed with âChInA bAdâ
Requires a warrant or subpoena. That is the difference.
just another devAlso requires the company to be US-based, so doesnât apply here. Well, not yet, thatâs the whole point of forcing them to sell or be banned.
I have a question for you. What is the difference between Google being banned in China and Tik Tok being banned in the US?
*crickets chirping*
Mans gotta sleep bro. Christ. Iâll reply after work.
There really isnât, but perhaps they should be honest about that.
Also, is Google banned or Google wonât do what China wants so left? I donât know the answer.
Can I ban NSA from spying on me? Iâm not even on fReEeDoOoOoM land, I should be entitled to some amount of privacy
Whatabout! Whatabout!
This is not whataboutism - itâs looking at the bigger picture. The point is that you should want to prevent all mass surveillance by social media companies. Not force them to sell so that the government can get its greedy paws on the data.