TikTok is taking the US government to court.

  • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Every negative thing about Tiktok is also true about Instagram and Twitter.

    • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Except the part about the authoritarian regime, the US has many problems but it’s still a democracy.

      Edit: I’m glad you downvote me because you never had to learn what living in a dictatorship is like, I didn’t, but my parents generation still did and I can tell you it looks nothing like the US of today. Women were only allowed to be housewives, groups of more than 2 people couldn’t talk openly in the street because that can lead to dangerous ideas spreading out, you would have to be careful what you said even at home because your neighbour could be listening to sell you out, all pieces of art and media would go through an government office to get censored, and so on, so yes, I stand with what I said, the US is a free democratic country even if you have been spoiled enough to think it is not.

      • kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey I was born in a country with a military dictatorship and my parents grew up under it.

        That’s exactly why I believe in freedom and liberty. Freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of association. We need to uphold these principles so that the US doesn’t slowly slip into authoritarianism like most democracies tend to do over the long term.

        That’s exactly why I oppose this TikTok ban with every fiber of my being. If a citizen wants to communicate on a Chinese platform, he has every right to do so under our laws. He can make the executive decision for himself about the potential risks or benefits.

        That’s what it means to live in a free society. You are advocating for authoritarianism while you rail against authoritarianism. Reminds me of 1984. War is peace, right?

        • orgrinrt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          He can make the executive decision for himself about the potential risks or benefits

          But should he? Is any one by themselves really capable? Note that I don’t really know what to think myself, purely asking.

      • demonsword@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        the US has many problems but it’s still a democracy

        Given the choice between hot shit and cold shit still ends with you being covered in shit. Heads or tails between two very similar parties hardly counts as a true democracy.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        And What does that have to do with anything? We aren’t dealing with China, we’re dealing with a corporation.

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not everything that’s not a dictatorship is a democracy. You’re using a strawman to argue your point.

        A democracy stops when there is a severe imbalance in influence on legislation between voters and lobbyists / corporations / or voters depending on income / colour of skin.

        There’s also a quasi oligarchy with freedom of speech, that’s about where western Europe is at. In the US, by now, a large part of the population has been deprived of basic human rights, as shown in unpunished police brutality and murders, and vigilante killings of people for their beliefs, opinions or identity.

        Neither still qualifies for democracy. We would have to unite about two thirds of the voters behind a new party to even hope to change anything that matters (hello climate change), and that’s assuming that a hypothetical party that would actually act in the interest of restoring democratic mechanisms would be persecuted or otherwise hindered by authorities.

  • atx_aquarian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What would give them standing? They’d have to be an entity protected by the constitution to claim that protection was harmed. Is it this (Wikipedia)?

    TikTok Ltd was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and is based in both Singapore and Los Angeles. source

    I guess I’ve never thought about what makes an entity have rights here. Buckingham Palace couldn’t just open shop here and start suing our government, right?

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • platypus_plumba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why can’t a country choose which services it wants to prohibit? Seems strange, it isn’t an American company.

      I don’t really care, just wondering.

  • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    At this point, I’d like to ask: If a foreign company threatens democracy in a country, is it legal for the executive to ban business with that company?

    No? Then that doesn’t make sense. It’s a FOREIGN company, the government should have the right to do whatever it needs to protect its citizens in that regard.

    • UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is the real question. Is there a loophole that allows foreign governments to freely exercise mass surveillance and psyops if they allow US citizens to post on a blackboard outside their offices?

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The government certainly does have the right to protect citizens and make whatever laws are necessary. In this case, the government can do so by amending the constitution. Until then, the 1st Amendment applies to all citizens, non-citizens, and business entities operating in the United States.

      • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is just blatantly false, if an organization is committing crimes or doing something the government dislikes then the government will sanction it, like it has done with almost every Russian Oligarch’s business, or front businesses for terrorist groups.

        I’m pretty sure the whole point of banning TikTok is that the government is alleging that TikTok has engaged/can be forced to engage in abusive or illegal practices.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      If tiktok were a serious threat, the executive branch would have already banned it by now via an executive order.

      That’s not what happend, instead a whole bill went through congress and got passed with the explanation being “foreign influence” as if American social media platforms don’t already do the same thing

      This is more about removing foreign competition and not about saving democracy or ensuring security.

      DoD already banned it 4 years ago for military because of the actual security threat of data collection.

      • UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        TikTok pushed a notifications to all US users with the phone numbers of their local congressmen to oppose the bill. So many calls came in that the phone lines were jammed.

        Let me distill that for you: China attempted to directly influence legislation with a mass propaganda campaign targeted at its US user base.

        Please explain to me why that isn’t a threat and why the US should allow hostile foreign powers to directly influence internal politics?

        • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          We’ve already established that Tiktok Tok is not the CCP. That’s what the whole first “gonna ban TikTok” fiasco was over. It’s why they don’t store US data in China but continue to do business in the US.

          That would be a business using the 1st amendment right (which everyone gets, not just citizens) to free speech to use it’s platform to ask it’s users to do something directly beneficial to them. Nothing illegal about it unless you want to reevaluate that “TikTok is the CCP” claim again.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Down with vertical videos, down with short form content!

    PS, China already bought all your personal data from Facebook.

    • irreticent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, you do care enough to feel the need to let everyone know your opinion on the subject.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh shut the fuck up. Can we please not devolve every online argument into circular “well you cared enough to post this” bullshit? It’s exhausting.

  • p3n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The ironic thing is that if the US government wanted people to stop using it because of the PRC, they should have just leaked some fake Snowden style documents saying that the NSA was using it. Everyone would drop it like a hot potato then.

  • NoLifeGaming@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not a fan of tiktok content but I do see that it was banned obviously for censorship. A good move.