But...did you read the entirety of the bill?
Business & Finance TikTok Thread
- Thread starter Husky_Khan
- Start date
Yes. I linked to the text of the bill. I grabbed the relevant quote from the bill. What more do you want? It's a shit bill that doesn't actually solve the problem, as it still lets facebook sell or give all the info to China.
An actual good bill would be to ban allowing sending info to the CCP. But they didn't want a good bill, they want an excuse to expand governmental power.
TikTok sucks. But the bill sucks more.
More on the bill:
...how would a bill banning selling if info to China work?
And...did you read what things president can do...
It literally mentions divisture. It is saying any foreing owned website or app the president wants to ban has to be given the chance to divest. And that he has to submit it to congres..
Did...did you nit read any further?
Ohh.
Even better. Let me get something for you. For more context on the above part.
See the highlighted?
Oh...what's that. A company covered that is...controlled by a foreign adversary AND is determined by the president....
Hmm.
And what is considered a forienf adversary on the bill?
Following the above...
And what does that part of US Code say?
Woah. Who knew this existed....
Last edited:
Pretty easily. Same sort of definitions, but instead of letting a president ban websites as they want to, it instead bans companies from selling US data to adversary controlled companies or the governments.
Wow, I read that too. Guess what happens next? Once you've loaded enough laws that depend on Foreign Adversary, all you need is a small bill that just adds extra countries to that definition.
Also, you missed part of the law. The part of the law where they defined what it means to be 'controlled by a foreign adversary'. A dual US/Chinese citizen who fled from communist china who owns 20% of a company? That's under foreign adversary control.
AirBnB? Which had to turn over all of it's data to China to operate in China, including DMs etc? Nope, that's not under Chinese control at all according to this bill.
You know who else is going to use this? Amazon, because they don't want to compete with Wish.com or Alibaba. Perhaps it will be used to ban the sites of prominent 3d printer companies like Creality, and force you to buy them at a significant mark up from Amazon instead. And I could go on.
Oh, you want to know what else is under foreign adversary control? All the Taiwanese websites! Because the US doesn't recognize Taiwan as a country, so now Beijing Biden gets to decide which Taiwanese websites go down once China starts invading, so that he doesn't get any more bad press.
I could go on.
Except he can't just ban them willy nilly....it says so in the bill.
What countries would they add? Because foreign adversary means a lot, and basically stops a lot of things going to said country. Mainly military stuff.
I do not see that anywhere in the bill.
And yes that's bad, but they require all companies that operate there to do that...
You mean sites that legitimately support slave labor?
And...I'm pretty sure there are plenty of sites that do that as well and arnt owned by forieng adversaries.
It is an exception because in the realm of the political landscape they do not count. We can sell weapons to Taiwan, but we can not sell weapons to China.
And I can keep going to prove you wrong.
Also, for everyone wondering.
Bill in question:
Here is tje bill in question
Sergeant Foley
Well-known member
Subscribed and following this discussion thread with strong intriguing interest.
So, quickly looking over the bill, because it's not horrifically huge for once, I noticed this big thing:
So there's a bunch of "and" conditionals in all the stuff the president has to do to get something declared a national security threat. Not only does the president/national security folks have to declare a country a threat via the procedure laid out in that other law, they have to make a public declaration and put out a public report that can be requested by anyone, aside from the classified part.
The main flaw is that the only counter to the president fucking up is going through the judicial system, but IIRC, the way they've done basically guarantees it goes straight to the Supreme Court for appeals.
Article: (3) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATION.—The term “foreign adversary controlled application” means a website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application that is operated, directly or indirectly (including through a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate), by—
(A) any of—
(i) ByteDance, Ltd.;
(ii) TikTok;
(iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that is controlled by a foreign adversary; or
(iv) an entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by an entity identified in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or
(B) a covered company that—
(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and
(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—
(I) a public notice proposing such determination; and
(II) a public report to Congress, submitted not less than 30 days before such determination, describing the specific national security concern involved and containing a classified annex and a description of what assets would need to be divested to execute a qualified divestiture.
(4) FOREIGN ADVERSARY COUNTRY.—The term “foreign adversary country” means a country specified in section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code.
...
SEC. 3. Judicial review.
(a) Right of action.—A petition for review challenging this Act or any action, finding, or determination under this Act may be filed only in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.(2) in the case of a challenge to any action, finding, or determination under this Act, not later than 90 days after the date of such action, finding, or determination.
(b) Exclusive jurisdiction.—The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any challenge to this Act or any action, finding, or determination under this Act.
(c) Statute of limitations.—A challenge may only be brought—
(1) in the case of a challenge to this Act, not later than 165 days after the date of the enactment of this Act; and
So there's a bunch of "and" conditionals in all the stuff the president has to do to get something declared a national security threat. Not only does the president/national security folks have to declare a country a threat via the procedure laid out in that other law, they have to make a public declaration and put out a public report that can be requested by anyone, aside from the classified part.
The main flaw is that the only counter to the president fucking up is going through the judicial system, but IIRC, the way they've done basically guarantees it goes straight to the Supreme Court for appeals.
Arguably national security, which falls under the president's purview, but realistically it's because Congress can't sort its shit out fast enough to make them viable arbitrators of whether a site's a threat.
Pretty sure the only four Adversary Countries are Russia, China, Iran and Uhhh North Korea I would assume.
EDIT: Apparently also Cuba and the Maduro Regime of Venezuela.
EDIT: Apparently also Cuba and the Maduro Regime of Venezuela.
Not necessarily, but that's the logical consequence of what they're doing.
In general, Congress has been shucking off responsibility to the administrative state and/or the judiciary for the past 30-40 years. Which "helps" when they can't agree on stuff (besides hating each other), because things keep happening... regardless of whether or not they're actually good/useful.
Foreign adversary means whatever the latest law says it to mean. Right now it's used like that, but there's zero guarantee it's used in the future like that.
Already, you support banning more and more reasons to ban sites. Also, Creality? not using slave labor. Not even close.
Not for this, it's not an exception. You are giving Beijing Biden complete authority to shut down any Taiwanese website.
This isn't much of a limitation. They just have to write up enough stuff, there's no way for congress to say "No, you did it wrong" or anything like that. It can be for any flimsy reason. The only limit is that it needs to be based in a foreign adversary country, which still isn't a good limitation as that can be expanded.
No, it's much worse than that. It goes straight to the DC Circuit court of appeals, then maybe to SCOTUS if they give the case cert. But they won't give all cases cert, and the DC circuit is overrun by dem judges. The best hope is that this law is overturned by SCOTUS entirely.
Again, there's a simple fix for this act: instead of banning websites, simply have a law stating that if you do business in America and collect data on Americans, you can't transfer that data to the CCP or affiliates. This solves the problem much more comprehensively, while not giving Biden an off switch for a ton of foreign websites.
Last edited:
Yes, but the main ones mentioned are the big 4.
So...what countries would be added? And what does it take to get a country added?
Not talking about Creality, but Wish, Alibaba, Shien, Temu. All of which use slave labor.
How? Because, Taiwan is an exception. We don't give weapons to China, but we do Taiwan. Yet the Foroeng adversary specifically says we can not give weapons to them.
It says it gives what ever group time to get divestment....did you actually read?
So it has a straight shot to SCOTUS...
And how would that be enforced? They can do it without it being known.
Who knows? That's the issue. And literally just an amendment to an omnibus bill that passes, or any other law
Did you read? Because you keep claiming I didn't when I cite parts of the law you don't like. But yes, they allow a whole 6 months for moving an entire company outside of China, including a sale and relocation, something that can be completely impossible to do within that time period.
Probably because when there's an authorization to sell to them, there is an exception in the law that authorizes it.
But there's no exception here, in this law. It doesn't say "This law doesn't apply to Taiwan", which means it does apply to Taiwan.
That's not a straight shot to SCOTUS. That's no more a straight shot to SCOTUS than any other law. In fact, it's a great way to avoid SCOTUS as there's zero chance of a circuit split (where one circuit rules X but the other Y, an actual straight shot to SCOTUS).
The same way any other spying law is enforced? Really, right now the issue is that it is completely legal to spy for China through handing them private info. Now it's still completely legal to do this, but some Chinese companies will get banned, some for bad reasons because they say bad things about the president.
Instead, I dunno, maybe make this form of spying against the law?
It's like if the US had no laws against spying during the outbreak of the Cold War, and instead of banning spying by US citizens, instead we just banned any refugees from the USSR. Totally ass backwards solution. Sure, some of the refugees may have been spies. But it wouldn't have stopped the vast majority of the spies in the US.
Tim Pool provides a good rundown of what the bill does:
TL;DW: It forces divestiture of the specified thing and bans only if the company doesn't divest the US part.
It does trigger libertarians because of past experience, but it's incredibly narrow in its tailoring.
TL;DW: It forces divestiture of the specified thing and bans only if the company doesn't divest the US part.
It does trigger libertarians because of past experience, but it's incredibly narrow in its tailoring.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
It is pretty narrow in tailoring. it probably could be abused. I get it. there are probably better ways to deal with this issue. that said I just can't bring myself to care about TikTok. it was always kinda cringe to me even before I found out ist was a double hit of Chinese spyware and Chinese manipulation.
49ersfootball
Well-known member
Fuck TikTok.