Montana Close To Becoming 1st State To Completely Ban TikTok (apnews.com) 138
rmdingler writes: Montana lawmakers have moved one step closer to passing a bill to ban TikTok from operating in the state, a move that's bound to face legal challenges but also serve as a testing ground for the TikTok-free America that many national lawmakers have envisioned. Montana's proposal, which has backing from the state's GOP-controlled legislature, is more sweeping than bans in place in nearly half the states and the U.S. federal government that prohibit TikTok on government devices. The House endorsed the bill 60-39 on Thursday. A final House vote will likely take place Friday before the bill goes to Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte. He has banned TikTok on government devices in Montana. The Senate passed the bill 30-20 in March.
TikTok, which is owned by the Chinese tech company ByteDance, has been under intense scrutiny over concerns it could hand over user data to the Chinese government or push pro-Beijing propaganda and misinformation on the platform. Leaders at the FBI, CIA and numerous lawmakers of both parties have raised those concerns but haven't presented any evidence to prove it has happened. Supporters of a ban point to two Chinese laws that compel companies in the country to cooperate with the government on state intelligence work. They also point out other troubling episodes, such as a disclosure by ByteDance in December that it fired four employees who accessed the IP addresses and other data of two journalists while attempting to uncover the source of a leaked report about the company.
TikTok, which is owned by the Chinese tech company ByteDance, has been under intense scrutiny over concerns it could hand over user data to the Chinese government or push pro-Beijing propaganda and misinformation on the platform. Leaders at the FBI, CIA and numerous lawmakers of both parties have raised those concerns but haven't presented any evidence to prove it has happened. Supporters of a ban point to two Chinese laws that compel companies in the country to cooperate with the government on state intelligence work. They also point out other troubling episodes, such as a disclosure by ByteDance in December that it fired four employees who accessed the IP addresses and other data of two journalists while attempting to uncover the source of a leaked report about the company.
Iffy on several grounds (Score:2)
* First Amendment. Feds have this issue too
* Bill of Attainder. Feds have this issue too(1)
* Interstate Commerce Clause
(1) they and the Feds may get around this by making a list of requirements that nobody but TikTok meets
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A state can regulate businesses, and indeed frequently does so. TikTok doesn't have some special inalienable right to operate their business in every jurisdiction in the world. Ultimately a state government can do anything the federal government does, except things specifically reserved for the federal government. This is a fundamental concept of federalism.
I am skeptical how enforceable this is at a state level. But it should theoretically keep it out of the stores for mobile devices from Apple and Google
Re: (Score:2)
A state can regulate businesses, and indeed frequently does so.
States can regulate intrastate businesses. Their ability to regulate interstate business much less international businesses are limited to nonexistent. I believe that TikTok is not a Montana based business.
. TikTok doesn't have some special inalienable right to operate their business in every jurisdiction in the world
They have the same rights as every other entity and company not based in Montana in that Montana has almost zero jurisdiction over them.
Ultimately a state government can do anything the federal government does, except things specifically reserved for the federal government.
The ability to regulate interstate and international commerce is not granted to states.
This is a fundamental concept of federalism.
You seem not to understand that limited nature of states to regulate things outside
Re: (Score:2)
You seem not to understand that limited nature of states to regulate things outside of their jurisdictions or understand their jurisdiction.
Montana can regulate internet services offered in their own state. That's not interstate commerce. We already have Amazon enforcing California sales tax, after failed attempts to avoid sales tax.
Re: Iffy on several grounds (Score:2)
Non sequitur. The reason Amazon charges California sales tax to Californians is because they have a presence in California. The same is true in pretty much every other state. If you have a presence in a state, you must charge sales tax to that state's residents.
Furthermore, SCOTUS has made it pretty clear that states can't regulate businesses that don't have a physical presence in their state, for the most part. So this law is not going to survive scrutiny for this reason. And also because it violates the f
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon has physical offices in California, they discussed moving them but in the end they were concerned that just operating business in California would still hold them to the law. Amazon made the right guess, as later this was settled in a 2018 SCOTUS ruling South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. et al. So yes, my statements do follow the original premise. Your assumptions on what SCOTUS thinks about the Commerce Clause is 5 years out of date is all.
If TikTok operates their business in Montana, then they can be he
Re: (Score:2)
Does a US state have the right to tell its residents that they can't run a particular app on their own computer?
Does a US state have the right to tell its residents that they are not free to associate with people through a particular app that they run on their own computer?
Can a US state tell its residents they can't access a particular website over the Internet?
A ban on "Tik Tok" would seem to require all of the above, unless the ban simply tells Tik Tok that they can't have
Re: (Score:2)
Any app, web site or people that push child porn will see bans and worse, both State and Federal level I assume. By expanding the definition of child porn, a lot could be banned.
Re: Iffy on several grounds (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Iffy on several grounds (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since TikTok is not a US citizen, it has no constitutional rights to free speech.
The first amendment says specifically "people" not "citizens". Your limitation of free speech only to citizens is imagined.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first amendment says specifically "people" not "citizens". Your limitation of free speech only to citizens is imagined.
That is misleading. The "people" phrase pertains only to the right to peaceably assemble.
For free speech, the 1st Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law".
So the speech of citizens, non-citizens, corporations, and even AI, is protected. Congress has no authority to restrict any speech.
Here's the whole thing:
"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 peacea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
not a US citizen, it has no constitutional rights to free speech.
Why would you assume that the Constitution only guarantees rights to citizens? You can look in the document but you won't find that in there. Time and time again due process for immigrants has been demonstrated in courts. We don't just round up people and shoot them (anymore). People still have trials. And the government still can't completely remove the free speech of non-citizen in US jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yeah, "banning" something from your own computer (or library or church or newspaper) isn't ever going to annoy anyone.
It's when you ban things from other peoples' computers, libraries, churches, newspapers, etc, that Americans (theoretically!) go running for their pitchforks and torc--oops, I mean--lawyers to file really easy-to-win court cases.
Re: Iffy on several grounds (Score:2)
Re: Iffy on several grounds (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
* First Amendment. Feds have this issue too
In Florida, that hasn't stopped DeSantis from shitting all over the 1A whenever it suited him and then letting the courts sort it out after the fact. It'd be really nice if our elected representatives read the 1A before proposing a law that clearly runs afoul of it, but here we are.
Re: (Score:2)
Ron DeSantis is a graduate cum laude of Harvard Law School.
He's not stupid. He knows full well that he is shitting on the Constitution.
He just thinks it will help him win the Republican primary, and he is probably right.
Re: (Score:2)
These are the same people who refuse even modest restrictions on handguns and assault-style rifles, saying that the problem is people not the guns. (*)
But when someone with epicanthic folds is involved, suddenly it's different. hrmmm.
* Guns don't kill people, gargoyles kill people. 1000 quatloos to anyone who gets the reference without looking it up.
The great firewall of Montana (Score:2)
I guess let's see which VPN works.
Re:The great firewall of Montana (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are falling from a frequent misconception that some ban is ineffective because tech savvy people can find ways to bypass it. This is not true. The objective of such a ban to remove the pervasive influence of some media, and this goal achieved because a larger fraction are not aware what VPNs are, or won't bother to set up one, let alone pay for it. There never is a need to ban something 100%, just make it inconvenient such that the use decreases. The value of the data for TikTok (or supposedly for the CCP) will decrease sharply even if a fraction of die-hard TikTok addicts decide to get around the ban.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much use the V chip was and how much it was there just to generate profit for a failing company
I do agree that kids expressing themselves with church or state oppression is perverse.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell kids they cannot watch. Then see all the effort that suddenly appears.
We have ample evidence that the number of people who put in "effort" are far smaller than the number of people swayed when no effort is required. This has applied for everything in all of history with one notable exception: prohibition, and that was largely due to the sheer scale of things it affected.
You can't stop people who *really* want something from getting something. You can stop people from stumbling upon it.
Re: (Score:2)
"sharply" not really (Score:2)
That would be the case if and only if 1) montana comprise a lot of tiktok user - probably not the case as Montana state population is about 1.1 million 2) if a law to ban a specific software which don't break any law is constitutional - I can't think of any precedent - other software bans I can see where about the software enabling copyright infringement. That is not the case here. I can't speak about Montana but around here s
"Completely" banning is relative (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't there a saying about this? Don't make laws you can't enforce?
Why? Why is this so important to ban? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The completely unregulated access to personal data makes me think that TikTok and many other businesses like it ought to be banned on the grounds of consumer protection. Prioritizing going after services that target children as their users puts TikTok near the top of the heap.
We'll see lots of failed attempts from legislators to patch over this problem until there is some industry self-regulation or some nation-wide regulation of consumer privacy. What I want to see is a North American version of GDPR, and
Re: (Score:3)
Ban the behavior, apply it across all corps.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lately it's all about drag queens
Yup, all those white male [imgur.com] drag queens [imgur.com] whose main political affiliation [imgur.com] just happens [imgur.com] to be Republican [imgur.com].
Lol. (Score:2)
Re:Lol. (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't properly keep the internet censored in freaking China, what's Montana think its gonna do?
Pass legislation that will get overturned because it's unconstitutional. Then they will blame the outcome on, woke, liberals, Hunter's laptop, trans people, gay people, rainbows on beer cans, Nike, the NFL, Disney, Pizza Hut, uhhh that's all I can name now.
Re: (Score:2)
Pass legislation that will get overturned because it's unconstitutional.
And the only people who truly benefit are the lawyers.
Who'll be the first to ban Facebook? (Score:3)
Or do you see a major difference between it's harvesting of your privacy and TikTok's?
Re: (Score:2)
Ban them all. Nobody needs FaceTik.
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger question is who'll be the first to ban Facebook. Or do you see a major difference between it's harvesting of your privacy and TikTok's?
Well that's the thing, isn't it? It wouldn't be completely surprising to see the Chinese retaliate and ban some American site from their shores, and then pretty soon we have geofencing and internet protectionism within invisible borders.
Worse still, is how the authorities enforce such a ban. There's already going to be some heat coming to monitor the interwebz more efficiently after Jack Teixeira placed classified material on a small site and it went unnoticed for an extended period.
We're from the governme
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The bigger question is who'll be the first to ban Facebook. Or do you see a major difference between it's harvesting of your privacy and TikTok's?
For an American, sure there's a huge difference. TikTok grants the Chinese government the ability to (1) observe aggregate trends about the US population with high level of detail, (2) tweak their suggestion algorithm to have mass influence on a huge swathe of the US population. For instance if China decided that they wanted the US to vote for a certain politician, or support certain policies, they'd have the ability to make subtle nudges by e.g. promoting certain videos more than others, and they'd have th
Re: (Score:2)
Do that many kids vote in the USA?
Re: (Score:2)
But the major difference is that one is a US-based company motivated by its shareholder values and company direction, while the other is a geopolitical competitor to the US.
I would posit that the interests of these 2 groups are more-or-less equally unaligned with those of the average American.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook happily gives the American government access.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger question is who'll be the first to ban Facebook.
Why would they ban Facebook? They are friendly to US interests. Don't be confused and think this is about children or society. This is about "OMG CHINA!" something that Facebook doesn't have any part in.
Speaking of Facebook is banned in China, for not too dissimilar reasons as to why TikTok is making the news now in the US.
Idiots (Score:2)
How do you absolutely guarantee a massive voter turnout of the contingency least likely to vote for you?
Ban TikTok.
Morons.
Pot, meet kettle. (Score:2)
Supporters of a ban point to two Chinese laws that compel companies in the country to cooperate with the government on state intelligence work.
So sort of like National Security Letters then...
Re: (Score:2)
They don't claim to be morally superior on this point. It's legitimate for China to ask things from Chinese companies. They just don't want it to happen with foreign companies. The law certainly forbid Chinese spies to operate in your and my country. Nobody claims such laws are stupid just because we all also try to have spies in China. We try reduce foreign spying here, but we also try to increase our spying on rival nations. It's fair game.
Re: (Score:2)
Spying is legal as long as you don't break laws. An old method of spying was for the spy to buy newspapers, read them and report. Worst that would be done to the spy was kicked out of the country, at least in the free world.
Fine by me (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But please, make sure to also Ban Meta, and all their ecosystem
No one has to ban Meta as no one is using it. In fact banning it might actually drive up user numbers. :P
Re: (Score:2)
But please, make sure to also Ban Meta, and all their ecosystem
On what basis? I mean this ban is anti-China rhetoric. Nothing more. Meta isn't friendly to the Chinese government, in fact their services are banned there.
Don't for a moment think that anyone gives a fuck about you, the children, society, or any other issue caused by social media in general.
Good. Montana is the test case/control group (Score:2)
It does what they want or not. Let's study the results.
China bans most of TikTok to its kids. Why is that?
Re: (Score:2)
It does what they want or not. Let's study the results.
Isn't this one of those states with more cows than people? I doubt any results would be relevant to the states where the majority of the population actually resides.
Re: (Score:2)
Does China ban TikTot? My understanding is they basically ban children from all social media, as well as things like gaming with the idea of raising productive members of society. I don't agree but it is understandable not to want kids spending all their time online.
I Would Have Loved (Score:2)
Hypocritical (Score:2)
I find it entertaining that Tik Toc as a Chinese company is belly aching about the U.S. limiting use but at the same time, China censors and controls various search engines and forms of media in their own country.
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Not sure why you think a website or the installation of an app cannot be geo-restricted, but they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Montana government? Yea, right. A can of whoop-ass will be opened as soon as any attempt to geo-block it.
Would be fun to sit back and sniff the traffic to see where the signals are coming from.
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
What does opening a can of woop-ass over a social media service ban look like?
Re: (Score:2)
Get a packet sniffer and find out!!
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why you think a website or the installation of an app cannot be geo-restricted, but they can.
Because (at least with Android), side loading exists, so even if the app store requires GPS location to operate, side loading bypasses the app store. And of course if the app store restriction is based on geolocating IP address, that's trivial to bypass with a VPN.
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
All you're describing is a ban that isn't 100% effective.
Re: (Score:2)
All you're describing is a ban that isn't 100% effective.
It will be very effective with old people and barely effective with TikTok's target audience. Kids, who are much smarter than most all lawmakers, will get around the ban trivially.
Re: Idiots (Score:3)
Heh. That's the polar opposite of how Tik Tok's target audience is usually generalized around here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Or they could order Tik Tok to geo-fence their service just like virtually all streaming providers do right now for advertising purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
Or they could order Tik Tok to geo-fence their service just like virtually all streaming providers do right now for advertising purposes.
Let me get this straight you think Montana can order TikTok to enforce geofencing because other companies like streaming services do that internally and voluntarily? Bahahahahaha. You do know that Netflix, for example, geo fences based on their own internal systems. There is no iGeoFence plugin that Netflix ordered off Amazon and then plugged into their own systems. Also Netflix was willing to do that voluntarily. No one ordered Netflix to do that. Also you realize that TikTok based in China does not have t
Re: (Score:2)
Let me get this straight you think Montana can order TikTok to enforce geofencing because other companies like streaming services do that internally and voluntarily?
I'm saying the tech is there, despite your naysaying about it. As for Montana's legal/constitutional issues around it, that ain't my state nor my lane, but they certainly do have they ability to put pressure in the right places to enforce a ban.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm saying the tech is there, despite your naysaying about it. .
Please cite any part where I said it was not technically possible. I asked practically how Montana would achieve this ban. Then you respond that Montana could "order" TikTok to do something because other company's do it voluntarily and willingly. That is as idiotic as my mom ordering me from another state to give her a grand child because she has friends who have grandchildren. Yes it's technically possible IF TikTok wanted to do it but you have failed to show any feasible or realistic plan on how Montana c
Re: (Score:2)
What they were talking about was fining American companies doing business in Montana for providing TikTok. Not sure why you needed me to tell you this since in your original post there were constitutional issues... which I never disputed.
Re: (Score:2)
What they were talking about was fining American companies doing business in Montana for providing TikTok.
Baahahahahahaahahahaa. And how is Montana going to collect fines on a company that has no assets in Montana and for technical purposes is doing ZERO business in Montana? How were they going to enforce anything on TikTok? You seem not to understand this point.
Not sure why you needed me to tell you this since in your original post there were constitutional issues... which I never disputed.
Not sure why you had to bring up that it was technically possible for TikTok to capitulate and do whatever Montana wants when 1) they do not have to 2) Montana is not allowed to regulate interstate commerce 3) Montana has zero jurisdiction over TikTok.
Re: (Score:2)
And how is Montana going to collect fines on a company that has no assets in Montana and for technical purposes is doing ZERO business in Montana?
I must have shifted into a parallel Earth where Apple does no business in Montana.
You seem not to understand this point.
Hmm... I am detecting unusually high levels of irony in the area.
Re: (Score:2)
I must have shifted into a parallel Earth where Apple does no business in Montana.
No you have shifted to an irrelevant point unless you do not understand TikTok and Apple are not the same company right?
Hmm... I am detecting unusually high levels of irony in the area.
Dude you are the one making demands for which you have little understanding. "Montana can order TikTok. Montana can fine TikTok. Montana can demand grandchildren." Again I must ask you that you understand Montana has zero jurisdiction over TikTok right?
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Heh! Kinda hard to discuss this topic if you have to have Apple's involvement with Tik Tok explained to you.
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
So... you don't understand Apple's role in this topic. Okie doke. Not sure why you're so opinionated on this topic when you don't get the basics.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
It's hard to explain to you when A. you're heavily opinionated on it and B. you don't have the prerequisite knowledge on this topic. Do I spend time writing an essay including all the mundane stuff you don't know or do I just suggest you do I direct you to Google?
I'm lazy, going for the latter. If you want my comment on anything I'll be happy to IF you can simply state what relevant relationship Apple has with Tik Tok in this context. If that's too much for you then please have a good weekend.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to explain to you when A. you're heavily opinionated on it and B. you don't have the prerequisite knowledge on this topic. Do I spend time writing an essay including all the mundane stuff you don't know or do I just suggest you do I direct you to Google?
Bahahahahahahaha. I love how you seem to assert to know something about the topic when you have yet to answer a simple question on how Montana is going to enforce their ban on a company for which they have zero jurisdiction. That has always been the central question: How does Montana does this? Your answer has been: They can order them. They can fine them. Both are at best non-answers. Both seem to ignore the fact that TikTok will fight the legislation and in the worst case scenario they do not win in court
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Ill read all that in a bit, first can you ... succinctly this time... tell me what Apple's relevant context is? Just asking for a quick sentence, then I'll read your novel.
Re: (Score:2)
Ill read all that in a bit, first can you ... succinctly this time... tell me what Apple's relevant context is? Just asking for a quick sentence, then I'll read your novel.,
Logical fallacy: Shifting the burden. Why don't you answer the question I have asked all along: How does Montana plan to enforce anything on anyone?
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
I'm trying to get there. The sooner you quit draggin your feet the sooner we can get there. I ain't writing a paragraph only for you to not understand it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I asked a simple question and you wrote a novel. Once I get that simple answer we can start moving again. Feel free to continue dragging your feet and blaming me for it, doesn't bug me none.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Baahahah you draggin feet! Ooh ho ho ho ho"
Anyway. Ok, here's your answer:
Montana Just Passed the First State TikTok Ban
The first-of-its-kind law bans TikTok on devices in Montana and paves the way for copycat legislation in other states.
Image for article titled Montana Just Passed the First State TikTok Ban
Photo: Dan Kitwood (Getty Images)
Montana made history on Friday by becoming the first state legislature to approve a wholesale TikTok affecting nearly all devices in the state. The first-of-its-kind ba
Re: (Score:2)
The first-of-its-kind law bans TikTok on devices in Montana and paves the way for copycat legislation in other states.
Bahahahaha. That does not even remotely address on how Montana is to enforce it. It requires 1) Other states to pass legislation. 2) Requires all legislation to pass court challenges. That is at best an idiotic answer.
Montana made history on Friday by becoming the first state legislature to approve a wholesale TikTok affecting nearly all devices in the state. The first-of-its-kind ban, which goes far beyond previous state efforts banning the app on government devices, could set the precedent for a wave of TikTok bans in other Republican-led states. Widespread TikTok bans, for better or worse, could become a reality.
Copy and pasting an article does not address HOW Montana is supposed to enforce this ban.
How would the ban work?
This part does not remotely address HOW Montana will enforce the ban. This section only brings up that there will be court challenges. At best this is a red herring non-answer
TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter promised a legal challenge over the measureâ(TM)s constitutionality, saying the billâ(TM)s supporters âoehave admitted that they have no feasible planâ to enforce âoethis attempt to censor American voices
You do realize your own artic
Re: (Score:2)
It does... you just didn't read it because it's too long and now you can't admit that. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
You could... but my post contained the answer and it's not like I can edit it after the fact. Doesn't bug me any.
You chose the hard way. The easy way is still available.
Re: (Score:2)
You could... but my post contained the answer and it's not like I can edit it after the fact. Doesn't bug me any.,
That is a lie and you know it. Your continued insistence belies the type of person that you are.
You chose the hard way. The easy way is still available.
What easy way? Your way is copy and pasting something without every actually addressing the question because you know you were absolutely wrong but cannot accept the truth.
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
The easy way was for you to just briefly describe Apple's involvement so I know you understand enough of the context to continue. You found that too difficult so I sent you the article which contains the missing context. You're welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
You answer was too long, and you felt the same way when I gave you your own medicine. You really think you're gonna shame me that way? Heh! ;)
Re: (Score:2)
"You answer was too long"
So you are admitting that you lied because I gave an answer but you keep saying I did not.
when I gave you your own medicine.
1) So your point on my "own medicine" is not to provide any answers. So again you lied. 2) You are admitting you cannot handle reading multiple paragraphs How do you function in life?
You really think you're gonna shame me that way? Heh! ;)
At this point you demonstrated you have no shame. Truth is also something you seem not to value
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
I never said you didn't have an answer within your novel. That was you saying that! Heh!
Having a lil trouble keeping details straight, are we? ;)
Re: Idiots (Score:2)
Restricted doesn't mean "100% effective."
Re: (Score:2)
Nice to hear after a natural disaster.