US Appeals Injunction Against TikTok Ban (nytimes.com) 25
The federal government on Thursday appealed a judge's ruling that prevented the Trump administration from imposing a ban on TikTok, the viral video app owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. The New York Times reports: In a filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the Justice Department argued that a preliminary injunction issued last month by Judge Carl Nichols in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia should be lifted.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said it had no further comment beyond the appeal. TikTok declined to comment. It was not immediately clear when the court might act on the government's appeal.
The government's decision to appeal the injunction, which delayed TikTok from being banned in U.S. app stores, further escalates the battle between the White House and ByteDance. The move is part of a Cold War between the United States and the Chinese government. The Chinese government has for years prevented its citizens from using international apps like Facebook, Twitter and other communications services. Since President Trump took office, he has repeatedly moved to stop Chinese companies from investing in and acquiring American companies. Citing national security concerns, the administration has also sought to stop American citizens from using Chinese-owned apps and has worked to banish Chinese technology and hardware from American telecommunications networks.
The government's decision to appeal the injunction, which delayed TikTok from being banned in U.S. app stores, further escalates the battle between the White House and ByteDance. The move is part of a Cold War between the United States and the Chinese government. The Chinese government has for years prevented its citizens from using international apps like Facebook, Twitter and other communications services. Since President Trump took office, he has repeatedly moved to stop Chinese companies from investing in and acquiring American companies. Citing national security concerns, the administration has also sought to stop American citizens from using Chinese-owned apps and has worked to banish Chinese technology and hardware from American telecommunications networks.
your freedom ends at the border (Score:5, Insightful)
So now US citizens, just like Chinese citizens can only use social media platforms that the government approves of.
Explain this (Score:4, Insightful)
The Chinese government has for years prevented its citizens from using international apps like Facebook, Twitter and other communications services
Then explain why Chinese citizens have for years been able to, and are still able to, use international apps like Bing, Outlook, Apple App Store, ...
Hint: those not blocked agree to obey local laws, just like TikTok obeys local laws of the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all of China's laws are good, and they might not be worth obeying. If they require you to store data on local servers, as I've heard other countries do.... You have to provision space over there - Does that mean building new facilities? Contracting with a third party? How's their security? How do we split up our infrastructure and back-end so that only Chinese users' data goes there - or do they need everyone else's too? In addition to these potentially existential business and technological concerns, y
Data access (Score:2)
Guess why does Europe want their citizens' data to be stored in European servers?
As this is the only way to cut US secret services from accessing this data. (Even this is not a guarantee ofc, but at least gives some chance.)
Seriously. GDPR is all about data access, and as anyone knows, you cannot enforce control over data that sits in US.
US-based cloud services have been extremely successful in conquering the world. Now US law enforcement is trying to dismantle this success by building distrust with the US
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to say that it's inherently good or inherently bad. I think it's most accurate to say it depends on implementation. It's clear that the Chinese will implement social media to repressive ends, while it's possible some countries in Europe won't. So compartmentalizing these platforms will work out better for some than others. On the whole it might provide a balance between the "connecting people" aspect of the internet that's been hyped for the last 30 years, against the dangers inherent in a global
Re: (Score:2)
45's ego (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no national security threat here at all. That's BS they are flinging as an excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
You should explain that to Chuck Schumer, since he started this national security investigation into TikTok.
Re: (Score:2)
You should explain that to Chuck Schumer, since he started this national security investigation into TikTok.
What's wrong with investigating to find out the truth? Without appropriate knowledge you can't make good decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You should explain that to Chuck Schumer, since he started this national security investigation into TikTok.
And yet it went nowhere until Trump personally was made to look foolish.
(More foolish than usual.)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is hosting the Rush Limbaugh show instead of doing the presidential debate that he chickened out of.
It's a call in show. TikTok kids, you know what to do.
Quadruple negative (Score:2)
"Appeals", "injunction", "against", "ban".
The public has long lost any insight into who is claiming what in this trade war.
As an European, I am torn between
- applauding US for protecting its culture and economy against unwanted foreign influence, and
- condeming US for obstructing international free trade & services.
Re: (Score:2)
As a European I'd expect you'd generally share in the ideals of democracy, freedom, and human rights. Sure, we draw our lines in different places and have certain contentious issues (where free speech ends, socialization of certain industries, etc). Europeans and USians shouldn't have been so greedy as to trade with an entity as evil as the Chinese in the first place. Ideologically they aren't even remotely compatible with our cultures and use any gains they make to abuse their own people, actively wage inf
Re: (Score:2)
First of all your argument is flawed https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Ad-Hominem-Tu-quoque. Aside from the fact that hypocracy isn't a logically valid argument, the case I was making was that our greed in trading with the Chinese has funded the evil things the Chinese are doing. In what way would that be invalidated by having made that mistake somewhere else?
Second, while I agree we should stay out of other people's silly holy wars the interactions between militant Isreali's and militant
Stop mentioning Trump in this regard (Score:2)
This started out with "The United States" as it should be. This is not a Trump issue and not something which should change or let us with any change in administration.