• tron@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think it’s pretty clear the ban will be overturned. Congress just attached it to Ukraine aid because it was popular enough and they could ram Ukraine and Israel aid thru. The Supreme Court ruled in 1965 that Chinese propaganda is protected speech 8-0, in the middle of the red scare. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamont_v._Postmaster_General

    If they want to truly go after tiktok we’re gonna need data privacy bills and oversight that affects ALL social media platforms. Congress isn’t serious about fixing issues. This isn’t a serious ban. They just want sound bytes to play back home.

  • slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    There’s compelling arguments either way. On one hand, this is a pretty naked attempt to hit at China and control the flow of the US government’s desired information.

    On the other hand, the legislation isn’t technically a ban, but a forced divestment of a corporate asset. The power of the government to force the breakup, dissolution, or divestment of corporate entities is the basis of US antitrust law, and is well established.

    It’s an interesting case.

  • TacticsConsort@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Huh. Well, that’s an interesting turn of events.

    I mean, I’m not a lawyer, but the basic premise seems solid. US has that whole ‘corporations are people’ shtick going on, and… well, guess now it’s time for that ruling to become inconvenient for the government.

    • subignition@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It won’t happen, but imagine how satisfying it would be if TikTok was the domino that led to Citizens United being overturned

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Although it would be funnier if it went the other direction and corporate personhood was so fundamental that the 14th amendment applied to them meaning they couldn’t be owned by shareholders as that would be slavery.

    • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      We should not throw out our rights, just because China doesn’t have those same rights.

      China should be the example of a bad way to monitor the internet, not the end goal.

      • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        We should also not allow any company that has lied directly to the US public and the government to continue to be a private company.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          So basically all big companies, certainly all major social media platforms, have to shut down or be nationalized?

          Sounds a bit drastic but ok, I’m with you!

          • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Sure, pre “trickle down” Canada crown corporations: Passenger Trains, now private(Via Rail) Oil: Imperial Oil, now Enbridge(and its insane russian doll network of shell companies) and Petro-Canada ISPs: BCTel+AlbertaTel: Telus, Ontario and Quebec: Bell Even just that subset would drastically change Canada for the absolute better.