Is It Legal To Ban TikTok? What Happens Next?
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 05. 2024
- China, China, China! 🚀 Start saving with Rocket Money! Managing your finances starts here: legaleagle.link/rocketmoney ⚖️⚖️⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
👔 Suits by Indochino! legaleagle.link/indochino
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images and AP Archives
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)
Maps provided by MapTiler/Geolayers
Do you think the TikTok ban will be enacted?🚀 Start saving with Rocket Money! Managing your finances starts here: legaleagle.link/rocketmoney ⚖⚖⚖ Get a great lawyer, fast! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
Firstly, it not a ban. Its a force to sell. If they refuse to sell, yes. It needs to be banned and heavily monitored by U.S. intelligence agencies.
Im hoping that the ban (or whatever you want to call it) is struck down. It doesnt seem right. However, i do acknowledge that china having access to all of those users data is very concerning. Then again tik tok is not the only way china could attain that data its just the easiest and cheapest.
it should be banned
Pander to the hwat?
The threat is not so much about user data, the threat is in the nature of the information users receive. As an example, China can manipulate the algorithm to hide Uyghur atrocities, favor anti Taiwan news or pro Hamas news and highlight pro China propaganda. And as the app is primarily used by youngsters, this is a national threat.
If data about users is so dangerous, maybe laws should restrict any such data being held by anyone!
Or we should stop selling it like literally every other platform does. There is nothing secret about your data in the US, if they wanted to China could buy all your data and info on the open market.
US Government: "wait, no, that's not what we meant"
I don't think they are accurate. Objectively, tiktok snoops your phone unlike what any other app gets away with. This means they can have access to private phone records no other company does
If you consent to having your data being used then you can’t complain about your data being used
What do you think the “terms of service” is?
My thoughts exactly!
If lawmakers are so worried about the privacy and security of the citizens they represent, perhaps they would be working harder to make the sale of user data to third parties illegal
@@AmazedBunion So it's fine as long as they go through the slightly longer step of buying it from one of the other companies that actively steal our data, like meta, got it 8D
@@AmazedBunionIndeed; it's not really about protecting people, just racism against the Chinese. Good observation.
@@MicaiahBaron you had to resort to a bad faith argument confirming you already lost. no one hates chinese citizens. they (rightfully) hate the CCP and the chinese communist government.
also lolol at this guy liking his own comment.
Saying it's about data privacy is really just the surface part, the part they don't want to say is that this is a move to reduce Chinese influence in the US, and also limit their growing market there. It started with TikTok, but they'll probably try to extend it to things like Temu and Shein. The US Government has slowly started to take more and more actions against China's influence within the country, while companies are also slowly leaving China and trying to decouple their supply chain from it. All because China is both going through a lot of internal problems and becoming more outwardly hostile in the Eve of a possible and even probable Taiwan invasion.
Or doing more to make sure someone who tried to subvert democracy is NEVER allowed in office again
The fact that the Montana law was ostensibly created to protect children but the state failed to make any reference to protecting children in any of the briefs responding to temporary injunctions is definitely saying the quiet part out loud
That's partly because our state legislature has been more interested in culture war politics than actually governing, and partly because the Montana AG Knudsen is a political hack and a horrible lawyer.
Whenever someone says "think of the children" it's probable that they're "thinking of the children" in a much different way than most people, to say the least.
"Protect the children" is a good way to know they're going to announce some authoritarian anti-freedom BS and make it sound good. The moment you hear that, a bunch of red flags should go up.
Look at all the big words you used 😂 what a big boy😂
@@daniel_millican Ostensibly and injunctions. Wow.
Google it if you don't understand words.
every argument for the ban in terms of safety, applies for all social media ever.
I don’t see how part ownership by an adversarial foreign government applies to all social media ever…
I agree with the principle that ByteDance is untrustworthy with our data and privacy. The irony that the _American government_ is whining about collecting data on private citizens is profound.
It’s about what that information is being used for.
Think how your doctor collects your medical data. They have a reason to have that info and won’t/shouldn’t use it to harm you, but in the hands of someone else it could be dangerous and compromising to your health.
(Just an analogy, please don’t read too much into this).
i mean, yes, but that’s kind of why they’re upset. how the data is being used is an unknown quantity. not to mention, unlike china, the US government has a lot more rules and regulations they must abide by. they can’t just (legally and without pushback) access any US company’s servers and require the customer data to be stored in the US. in china, all of these things ARE the case.
our government should be held accountable too, i don’t think anyone is saying it shouldn’t. but in this case, there is a lot less oversight and a lot more sweeping overreach available to china that the US doesn’t have over companies in the requisite countries.
If you're a US citizen with more than 2 brain cells, you'd realize why having your own government have your data is infinitely better than some hostile foreign adversary having it.
@@p4rsec No they can't _just_ access any US company's servers. They need a subpoena or warrant first. Which the tech companies overwhelmingly comply with, and do not notify users when they do so. The threat from China hardly compares to the Fourth Amendment threats from our own government.
And that's not even counting the data that the US government collects or purchases without consent. Which I absolutely assure you they do.
@@nikkiwikki73 You're absolutely right, it is about what the information is being used for. I've seen how the US government uses the information they collect. Look up warrantless spying on NYC protests, and surveillance on Portland protestors for credible reporting on how the US government abuses private data.
I would be for a strict privacy law in the US. I don't think tiktok should have access to all of that data but I don't think facebook, google, microsoft, or any of their "trusted partners" should either.
yeah, all these "trusted partners" have probably indirectly sold to the CCP (or anyone for that matter) all our data at this point anyway because they only care about money
Only problem is is that the government wants to be able to peep on its citizens, which means they still want it being stored by those companies, and as long as it's viewable at all, it's sellable by those companies.
@@kairotox Yep because if it is stored by a private company then they can just buy it without having to get a warrant.
What "data" do you think they are stealing? all our government info is public records, the data the app gets is the fact that Jane Doe liked this video of dogs licking PB while grooming, so Jane Doe likes dogs or has dogs. Jane comments positively on someone's 'just went to the stylist and check out this color!' so they know Jane likes that kind of hair or has that kind of hair. Which is all anyone can find out by seeing Jane walking her dog on the street or asking her about her hairstyle, it is just data to sell ads to us better, Capitalism is worldwide and our own society has done it 50000 times in your life to you and you never knew, why care now?
i agree specifically regarding how that information being used for targetted ads, when one spends more time telling these algorithms that their predicted correlations have failed utterly.
So Tiktok is sketchy, but it's sketchy in a similar way to a lot of tech corporations and apps, data harvesters/traders, and websites, maybe some broader introspection regarding the industry and how laws and regulations even conceive of it is in order...
They don't care if AMERICAN companies have all that data and violate the privacy of Americans on a regular basis... only if "adversaries" have it.
3:04 It's technically correct.
Bytedance has Douyin, which is exactly Tiktok but for users in the PRC and its regions.
In 2019 Bytedance disabled access to Tiktok in Hong Kong SAR following allegations of improper data security, which just happens coincidentally during the Extradition Law and Bill protests occurring around the time. Tiktok is delisted in mobile app stores for accounts in Hong Kong, and links to the service is now met with a white landing page.
Also, part of their argument is that TikTok says that a US-only version of TikTok would never be economically viable. Douyin seems to work just fine in the China-only market though.
@@Saprophyte2to be fair, China _is_ a much larger market population-wise. A very quick google search indicates >750million douyin users vs
HK falls under the Chinese law which is why the shift of data laws in HK happened.
@@Saprophyte2 The difference is that Douyin is the original algorithm designed by the developers, they sold its license to create Tiktok (App) to allow to create an international version of Douyin. So Tiktok (Company) renamed Douyin as TIktok (App).
US wants to have a license copy of the algorithm. Aka its like getting an American version of AK47 but to manufacture AK47 in US soil, it needs License to manufacture from Kalashnikov, the original developers Bytedance doesn't want to sold its license to manufacture TIktok.
They've tried to copy Tiktok with its knockoffs like YT shorts and FB shorts (which is just basically a ripoff of Tiktok with US' censorship). But still was not as "efficient" and as good as the Tiktok Algorithm. So now they want the original copy of that algorithm.
@@Saprophyte2 Don't forget their BS defense that "Well, we'd be unable to transfer the code". No, that's literally exactly how code works, it's not a liquid substance that corrodes all containers, it's a bunch of data contained into files, which are then stored in folders. With a big enough flash drive you could move the code in minutes.
11:04 - "America lacks a comprehensive data privacy law" Or really anything that benefits consumers at all. It's almost like the US is favourable to businesses and the upper echelons of society...
One need only compare the price of insulin with the price of diabetes-inducing sugary treats that are marketed everywhere to make that connection.
Aka capitalism
@@austinhernandez2716 Yup. Never been a fan of capitalism. Money is a giant headache. I'd rather live a productive life and just get things than have to negotiate myself into slavery to afford shitty living conditions.
@@austinhernandez2716 No, since Capitalism at the very least has no governmental input. It leaves everything upto the market, which means that people still have a chance.
No, USA uses all the socialist and communist interference tactics, but aim the beneficial ones to the companies and the negative ones to the consumers and employees
@normalchannel2185 You really could have just saved some text just said "I have no clue what any of these terms actually mean, but I know if I throw them out there I'll sound interesting"
So... the EU should take a really close look at Facebook, is my takeaway
Gdpr compliance took years to migrate to
you saw the NYT headline Meta Fined $1.3 Billion for Violating E.U. Data Privacy Rules" in 2023?
"
the most hilarious result of this is if the EU did this same exact thing to American-owned Facebook
Is not the same case, EU can extradite Mark Zukerberg if necesary from the US, the US cannot extradite the CCP or the owner of Tiktok, the US and the EU are not declared enemies in march to a global conflict. Now yes, the EU should be worry and they're of META, as they we're the first to hit them with legislation.
Facebook is regularly fined by the EU, they just pay the fines and don't give a shit.
Rather than ban TikTok, wouldn't it be more sensible to ban applications which transfer data to/from China from app stores? Bonus: no more hazardous goods from Temu.
Can't have US laws limit the ability of US corporations to sell to the largest market in the world.
Neither are US laws allowed to limit US corporations from purchasing the cheapest products available.
It would be anticompetitive, or something something.
I wish alt tech sites like rumble,gab and even newsmax are the ones that deserve a ban
But how else am I supposed to get plutonium on the cheap??
For the feds watching: I was joking. Don't even have the Temu app.
That's pretty much how the law works. TikTok and bytedance are called out by name, but any company that is incorporated under an "adversary nation" can be brought to the attention of the president for review to be included.
@SageWon-1aussie Facebook, Google, Twitter, and more are already banned in China and have been banned for many years. Meanwhile bytedance is making tons of money in China (not with tiktok, though. It's banned in China too because of privacy concerns and data collection policies) while able to make even more money in the US.
There hasnt been a true marketplace of ideas since our public fora became privately owned. All social media should be publicly owned, free, free of any content restriction, advertising, engagement algorithms or data gathering, or privately owned and considered the publisher of all content contained within.
Imagine I had a newspaper and was given a free pass to print whatever anyone wanted to put in it, with no liability for me, because I told the government that the newspaper was so long it would be impossible to edit but such a newspaper was somehow crucial to public discourse. Then imagine I fill it with ads, gather the personal details for everyone who picks it up in order to sell, and promote writers who benefit me and my advertisers and increase uptake of the paper by putting the most divisive and cruel articles on the front page.
As mark Zuckerberg said, anyone who took that deal would be an idiot.
This is probably not the takeaway Congress wants me to have, but can we have a golden share law too? A 1% tax on all those fortune 500 companies who pay 0 taxes would actually fund our government.
The execs of those companies will keep bribing, sorry, lobbying Congress to prevent that
It would massively decrease the tax burden on the 98%
@@wolfiemuse Yuppers
The government likes giving them tax breaks then asking for money just to pay high interest so I doubt they would do that
@@wolfiemuse nah, they just increase spending. what will they spend it on? probably those fortune 500 companies.
Given the current state of the Supreme Court, whether or not something is constitution is irrelevant.
They have proved that numerous times, activist judges serving their owners.
The Roberts Court has little respect for precedent, creating large legal gray zones where the assumption is that courts will eventually resolve things in favor of the party with more money to litigate.
Trump judges serving his agenda. Nothing new
Check your grammar.
What do you mean by the current state of the Supreme Court?
Ok, web series pitch: "Legal Smeagol"
Where smeagol is the defense attorney and Gollum is the prosecutor.
“The Honorable Gandalf The White presiding”
I love how all those ‘promotes dangerous content’ examples are so clearly a problem with humans, not with TikTok.
6:03 Banning TikTok will not magically solve human stupidity
I’m pretty sure TikTok has most of the idiocy.
Wont even slow it's spread.
no... but it's a good start.
@@WritingCountingOriginal Nope, they will migrate somewhere else.
@@randomrobin7773 Yeah just look at what happened after Vine shut down
The shock after reading “smearing human feces on toddlers” 🤣
As the father of 3, I can safely claim that they did an efficient job of smearing feces all over themselves without any need for outside interaction.
Chinese influences aside, the biggest problem with tiktok is the algorithm. It's certainly a threat to the mental health of our children.
I read that part ahead of him because the text jumped out at me. So it was funny when he got to that part and had the same reaction I did 😂
@@ptrinch Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Toddlers are champions at smearing all kinds of substances all over themselves.
I think i know what they're talking about and they've got it kinda wrong. So there was this stupid trend where mom's would sit on the toilet then call their toddler and ask them to bring toilet paper, as the toddler hands the toilet paper over the mom "accidently" smears feces on their hand (except its just Nutella) then films the reaction. The child will cry, react shocked, gag etc and I guess it was meant to be funny
This sounds a lot like “I don’t like them, so you can’t be their friend anymore.”
Thank you for this. Really good job breaking everything down.
The USA really needs a legislative equivalent to the EU's gdpr, so of course Congress instead tries to ban tiktok.
We can and should do both.
@@GoneZombieno
the US wont do anything against the Corpos.
I mean, various EU countries are also talking about banning TikTok. Several have already banned it from government devices.
@@GoneZombie It's unlikely that this law will survive scrutiny. If they made an ordinary export/import control, it would work just fine. There are tons of things we can't export to foreign adversaries, including complicated software. They can justify imports the same way.
11:08 I so expected an ad for a VPN right there
I was expecting ads for incogni, or whoever deals with data brokers.
Definitely expected incogni advert
Always interesting, thank you.
The state of New South Wales in Australia passed the same type of law as Texas, banning TikTok on any government device or network.
That makes sense. If the government gives you a smartphone for work purposes, it is 100% their business what you download on it. I can also see them being tighter on apps that collect your data while on their secured networks. For example, I know some exercise apps are banned on military bases, because they post the path of your jog, and that can reveal secret locations.
it has the most business ties with the US, so it feels like the most yanky states to me
I live north of the Montana Canadian border. There's nothing to learn spying on us. We're really boring lol
Howdy neighbour. I'm fairly certain that the value of my personal information is effectively zero, commercially an politically.
It was mainly directed at protecting the nuclear missile info (since the silos are all throughout Montana) from what I understand. The child protection part was just an excuse in hopes to make the law stick.
Get your secret maple syrup recipe.
That sounds like something someone who is worth spying on would say.
If they want to take my bad credit score and debt...
The "forced to sale" part is what bothers me. If the apps is truly problematic or a national security risk then ban it outright, don't do this "we'll ban it if it's chinese but we'll let it continue if some american buys it". Because that makes it painfully obvious that no one wants to truly "fix" the app, all they want is switch the hands of whoever harvests all that juicy data.
Exactly. The US government wants the rights to that data.
This was my initial concern as well.
Also my ongoing concern.
It stops Chinese state media videos from being forced into your feed by the Chinese government
I mean that's the reason it's a problem but not twitter or facebook. Chinese security laws give them completely unrestricted access to user data in a way the US government doesn't have. That's the reason divestment was given as an option. It's also self serving, but no more than forcing users to quit the app for a US based alternative.
@@kingofhearts3185 There simply wouldn't be one, not as good at least. The rumor on the street is that Tiktok uses their Chinese user data to unrestrainedly develop an algorithm that is so impeccable, that none of the western big tech could keep up with. That's what makes Tiktok so addictive.
A much better tack would be to classify all these content providers as utilities, and make them open up their recommendation algorithms to replacement by custom algorithms.
I have nothing but contempt for TikTok. But ifTikTok is banned or its sale to a politically more desirable owner, what outlet is the next one to be deemed a threat to national security?
X because this right wing
A lot of those dangerous TikTok challenges were not spread initially on TokTok. The NyQuil Chicken was bery clearly and explicitly a joke. The news media picked it up and stripped out the parts that made it clear it was a joke and described it as a trend, even though by then the video was old, not widely seen, and had no evidence of causing anyone to do anything. The dangerous incidents didn't happen until those stories on the news got spread on social media and went viral. Not from the original TikTokers.
MatPat had a really thorough video debunking that, as well as several similar "trends" that were really media creations.
Yeah, the media is sensationalizing and lazy, but they’re also very unoriginal. They’re not making stories up out of whole cloth. Dangerous trends targeting kids started by kids has been a phenomenon since social media. The question then is how does TikTok affect that trend. It’d be interesting if anyone has (or even could) collected real statistics on this.
To me, it _feels_ like it’s had a detrimental affect on kids in a thousand ways-including making them more susceptible to getting caught up in challenge trends in general. Also, thinking that “It’s a joke and not meant to be taken seriously” is lowkey a childish understanding. Virtually no one sees the context behind a joke/trend-which can make it being a joke easy to miss for certain (or many) people if it is one. From there, all it takes is a clout chaser personality
Exactly, and even if they were created on tiktok banning the app won't stop dumb trends being made on other platforms
From memory nyquil chicken was a joke that originally came from 4chan, and wasn't meant to be taken seriously.
Stupid challenges for internet clout have been a thing for many years
They made a "trend" out of a joke. They have made trends out of jokes before. Or one or two kids did somethingstupid and they decised to call it a trend (like the tide pod thing.) And trends have existed loooong before social media.There are records of dangerous trends from before colr ictures were things that have existed. And records of kids doing trends before photos have existed. @@Kyle_Schaff
I don't use TikTok, but I also don't support the ban. I definitely think some legislation is needed, but it should be a data protection/algorithm transparency law that applies to all social media platforms.
If the same law applied to TikTok, Meta, X/Twitter, etc then there would be fewer constitutional issues.
Bro same
That's the main reason I dislike the ban, but I also don't want the government to be able to claim an app is a "threat" and effectively ban it. It gives them an easy way to disrupt media that they don't approve of.
Meta, X-formerly-known-as-Twitter, etc... aren't injecting Chinese state media videos into people's feeds.
Yea the ban is mega targeted and well funny thing is about these security concerns is tiktok actually has the highest security over the other 2 major social media companies here.
Good luck getting China to conform to any foreign laws.
“Steve-O, Donald Trump, Johnny Knoxville” 🤣🤣🤣
6:20 ...cooking "shicken" in NyQuil? You just reminded me of my Dutch auntie! 😊
"I will make it legal."
Senator Palpatine, who loves democracy and The Republic
I am the Senate. That will be a refreshing refrain come Jan 2025 when Trump returns to power... Somehow Trump returned!
That made literally no sense at all, my man. The reading/writing comprehension of Trump supporters is notably lacking @@ralphmtsu
@@TheChrisLeonewhat is confusing there? The guy is being sardonic by referring to Trump's dictatorial tendencies and making a joke extending the Palpatine analogy from the original comment.
@@TheChrisLeonethem saying that Trump is going to come to power isn't even stating support to Trump, it's more outlining an inevitability. Dems' poor choice of candidate combined with the left's moral inflexibility regarding the Palestine issue makes this outcome extremely likely, and all the more terrifying because of that.
For an argument regarding classified information, the government would have to disclose sources and methods.
And it’s not just the information, it’s how we get the information.
they can't have it both ways though, especially not with their history of attacking foreigners specifically to help their own citizens/companies under the guise of security etc, which then gets proven to be lies
@@mehere8038Yes but especially if some of these sources come from WITHIN CHINA then declassifying it before they are at least brought to safety would put their live at very high risk.
@@fluxuous6907 blar, blar, blar, that comment has no credibility to make after your last leader's antics does it! How many died cause of him declassifying/giving info to foreign governments again? CIA's description of the number of their operatives lost I believe was "alarmingly high"
As the video discusses, none of this is credible, due to the time it has been continuing for -- has been ample time to do all of that!
@@mehere8038 they can, both spying on their own people and preventing others from spying on them in the name of national security is honestly rather reasonable as an arguement.
Excellent use of 'yutes' at 1:20. Judge Haller would be proud
Thank you @LegalEagle. This whole thing sounds very similar to the attempt to ban Rock n Roll to me
18:27 I love when massive software companies complain their code is too sophisticated and complex to replicate, like when game studios shut down public servers but don't even try to start community run servers.
Any serious infrastructure that wasn't designed explicitly for it from the very beginning takes absolutely insane amounts of effort to migrate, let alone turn into a publicly usable service. This is a matter of migrating source code, deployments, configurations, databases, schemas, cloud computing, business intelligence, analytics, all of this for every single step of a complex software stack. This is something most companies have completely given up on doing and spend a ton of money simply on the manpower and resources required to keep maintaining older infrastructure because migrations are so incredibly difficult and simply not worthwhile from a business standpoint, it would be physically impossible to migrate TikTok in that short period of time without extremely big subsidies and even then it likely could not happen in the required timeframe.
They'll say it's too sophisticated and complex to replicate and then sue 3rd parties when they develop an emulated server that works exactly like the original
@@amicloud_yt it's complex to replicate because you have to fit lawsuits into the process
Recommendation engines are usually a bit of basic math, they aren't exactly much of any trade secrets. But they do seem to be playing up the _appearance_ that it's sophisticated.
Having worked at a large tech company, this is a *very* legitimate problem. TikTok is probably in large part written on top of proprietary tech stacks that are deeply and inseparably coupled with Bytedance. To actually pull off a divestment would basically require them to rewrite their entire codebase from scratch. And they'd have to do it all in a fraction of the time they did so the first time. They already have a reputation for working their engineers to the bone, so I don't think they could crunch any harder than they already have. There's just no way they could do it, I assure you.
Like, imagine that you have a website, but instead of using a web framework like React, it's built off of a proprietary framework that your company owns. The framework has a completely different way of working than any other open source option. The only possible way to move off of it would be to do a full rewrite in some other framework. This is especially true in this case because this law specifically wants them to decouple from Bytedance's code, so no forking allowed. Now apply this to everything-a proprietary logging framework, a proprietary server management framework, and anything else required to make a functional website/app.
Iirc Meta has made a similar defense with their own battling against forced divestment.
I have a crazy idea. Can we just criminalize the things that we don't want Tik Tok doing? That way we can protect American citizens from violations of their privacy in the name of profit.
I am A-OK with criminalizing government ownership/direct control of social media companies!
But then what about Poor meta? we need to understand, companies are people too, and they desereve profits! How else would they provide this service without taking our data?
/s
@@normalchannel2185 Meh. They're terrible, but not government owned/controlled. I guess we can let them live a little bit longer...
@@normalchannel2185no other company collects data in the malicious way tiktok does. Its pretty much Spyware on your phone as opposed to what other companies do which is closer to ad profiling.
But what the US government doesn't want tiktok doing is letting Palestinians exist.
Thanks!
That was a wild ad transition
The best part is Mitt Romney and Anthony Blinken openly talks about at a conservative/libertarian event about how difficult it is for the US to control the narrative or America "PR" because of social media. It's so blatant.
Hard to control the narrative with so many bot farms in adversaries' pockets yes.
Thankfully, when you're the CCP you don't have that problem, because TikTok propaganda is directly under your control.
PR for israel, the most sacred thing in USA
Since the backlash to the War on Terror and collapse in trust in US institutions the US government has been very concerned with using policy to fight wrongthink. There's no USSR to compete with, Russian propaganda is two-bit, China is terrible at soft power... so they keep passing off international and domestic hatred for US strategic policies as a scheme by foreign adversaries while the rift between US elite assumptions and positions and the moral sensibilities and concerns of the US public just grows.
Go Jews!
So Montana's reasoning for wanting to ban TikTok is because teens might be convinced to do stupid things? Have they SEEN Jackass?
Somehow, SOMEHOW, every single generation makes the same exact error in judgment and thinks that stupid behavior is brand-spanking new, and invoked ONLY with an acceptable target and nothing else.
Even that is regulated. It was rated R, and not viewable by teenagers at its debut without parental permission
@@VirginiaBronson there's the TV show that came first. Put all the warnings you want kids still find things to imitate. It's the same dumb argument used against video games and wrestling
@@odorousobject8165 it’s not the same argument because it’s a hostile foreign power that’s holding the influence rather than a run of the mill, greedy American corporation. We can regulate American corporations. We can’t regulate China. We banned certain uses of lead because it was damaging children’s brains, and we should do the same thing here.
Almost like it's the parent's responsibility to teach their child to not be an idiot.
Great news!
Hey question, ive watched a lot of slapp suits happen especially here on youtube. Can i write an amicus brief to the courts? It would be cool if you made a video on how thats done. Thanks
Those reasons listed to be ban also happened on Facebook and CZcams
"but they are US owned sooooooo" - US lawmakers
@@crazydinosaur8945 in pretty sure they have Chinese shareholder
Imo, there's actual valid issues with tiktok being owned by a Chinese company specifically, and lawmakers are so inept that they go after the wrong issues with it.
Not a bad reason at all. Something China does all the time. It's not wise to defend a foreign entity like this. @@crazydinosaur8945
@@crazydinosaur8945 Legitimately why the law can't affect them. It specified that it be foreign owned. Which has all sorts of potential legal ramifications.
11:05 I thought we were about to get an Incogni advert, my brain has been poised and it wasn't even tiktok that did it
Same 💀
Influencer marketing is a disease. I’m glad LegalEagle is not intrusive with it in the middle of a video and puts it at the end.
I just made a comic book about data privacy, visualizng ourselves in the web. Any advice on how to share it or publish it?
Great video 👍🏼
1:22 “pander to the youts…” I see what you did there, Mr Eagle. Amazing reference
The problem I have with this situation is simply how hypocritical it all is. If it's a matter about protecting user data, then _no company_ should be allowed to collect the data of American users. Period. That, or companies should be extremely transparent about what they're collecting and allow users to opt out of these things. I'm the type of user who goes through all of my settings to enable/disable various functions. While I understand the national security aspect of the situation as well, a foreign entity can obtain user locations, personal information, etc from any tech company at this point. Perform a wide ban on the gathering/selling of user data, don't ban a single app because you don't approve of it.
But it's not all a matter of user data. The problem is China. I honestly don't understand why people are ignoring that. Ask yourself this, do you think anyone would be talking about a Tiktok ban in the US if the company was owned by Japan?
@@balzarinemythus50Question is how is China knowing where I am or doing a national security threat? My existence and national security don't overlap. I have zero access to classified information or any national decision making ability.
@@balzarinemythus50 The US having personal data is a threat to everyone else. It's all hypocritical.
@@balzarinemythus50 The problem is that the Chinese government can just buy our user data from American companies. Mobil service providers were just fined 200 million dollars for selling user data. No company can be trusted to hold our user data, American or not. There needs to be actual changes with regards to how companies store user data instead of targeting an app just because it is somewhat associated with China.
Will the app get blocked on phones that already have it or will it become a selling point like flappy bird?
That’s my question
Or PT
Depends on how tech literate the people who try to implement this are. Forcing app stores to just stop selling it would be a very poor way to make this stick,. My guess is that there will be an ISP enforced ban on the TikTok servers, so it will just not work in the country. Similarly to how other countries block reddit, cloudflare, explicit content, etc... This is a pretty effective way to do it, as anyone without a VPN will be out of luck. There really isn't a 100% solution, though.
Well, the app won't have any servers to connect to for content if it gets shut down. At least Flappy Bird still works despite not being listed on stores; TikTok's content is online, so severing that connection renders the app completely useless. So no, it's not going to be a selling point and nobody needs to remotely remove the app from your phone, they just need to shut down the servers directing the app to its content.
As the law is written the last time I read it, it would be illegal to even use a VPN to connect to it. Not only that it is illegal for the VPN to let you connect. This can also be applied to any company that the president deems a foreign threat or owned by a foreign threat.
@1:22 did you say "Yutes"? What is a Yute?
I'd love to know to what extent if TikTok gets banned, do the arguments made against it provide legal precedent for any other online platform that is known to do the same thing? If TikTok is banned for fear of data collection it seems silly to then ignore everywhere else on the internet.
I would like to know how many members of congress fighting for the ban own shares in Meta or Google. I refuse to use Shorts or Reels if this ban goes through.
Even better. Short form video is trash.
@@specialnewb9821 unfortunately it is going to stay. YT adding ads to shorts on desktop made me realize how effective it is. It is so much easier for an ad to blend in with the rest of the short form content. If I was an advertiser I would definitely be willing to pay more for ads on short form than long form.
Good for you lol. If you feel this strongly about an app, you need a break anyways haha
Chill bro you have 15 subscribers
CZcams Shorts suck anyway. I hate that many of my favorite content creators are falling for that key-jangling trend.
Please do a 'laws broken' review of the original Ghostbusters! So. Many. Laws. Broken.
"Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back."
There's the explosion when their containment system was shut down - who's responsible? They didn't trigger the explosion, but they did create the situation. What if Peck had not shut down the grid but there was simply a blackout? If you set up something within civic boundaries which may explode if things go wrong, is that legally/morally the same as setting up a bomb and hoping it doesn't go off?
Also, Peck marches into the building without identifying himself, without invitation, and without permission - he then threatens Janine with being arrested for "interfering with a police officer" even though he's... well... not a police officer. Don't such entries require something a little more formal, like the officers/agents/etc announcing themselves and why they're there, and immediately producing the warrant or writ or something?
Also, there's all the damage the Ghostbusters caused to the hotel - who's liable? They were hired to come in but I doubt there was a contract in place stipulating who'd pick up the bill for property damage. Nor was the customer aware there would be property damage - they didn't even know how much the service would cost. Is that legal?
When they fired at the maid, wasn't that Assault with a Deadly Weapon?
Also, are there any legal restrictions on what equipment civilians may mount on a vehicle, such as sirens, blue lights, etc?
Ghostbusters 2 invites TONS more legal analysis!
The other Ghostbusters movies simply aren't worth discussing. Or watching.
My father would probably be helpful there. He was one of the top experts in nuclear law in the 1980s in New York. He studied it in the 70s when he worked at the Tennessee Valley Authority. He told his boss he didn't know anything about nuclear law. He told my dad "that's OK, neither does anyone else. It's brand new. You study it and then you'll be the expert."
@@Sam_on_CZcams Of course it was the TVA that wanted that...for those unaware, Tennessee is home to Oak Ridge National Labs, which was the birthplace of the basic design of the most commonly used nuclear reactor (which was adapted from their military design). It's also where they chemically purified uranium ore for the Manhattan Project. It's still a major governmental research site, and has been home to the world's most powerful supercomputer on at least one occasion.
Devin, would love to get your thoughts on the OpenAI / Scar Jo situation
That would be great! It would give (the much superior) YT shorts its time to shine!
Lol. I loved the use of "Yutes" in the first couple minutes. Bravo!
"What is a yute?"
🤣🤣🤣
What's galling about the criticism of TikTok is how these same people don't seem to have privacy concerns about other platforms (largely based in California).
Or the fact that China alone owns 384,000 acres of US soil. Out of the 43.4 million acres of IS soil owned by foreign countries, in addition to China's, there are ally nations of China that legally own our land. Banning tik tok won't do anything. If the Chinese government wanted to spy on us so bad, they could literally just above table, on the books, and perfectly legally just fly their people and do it in person without being stopped or raising any suspicions.
I see your point. I'd like to add a point in favor of this ban that I don't see discussed at all. Let's be real, no country abusing a power will ever stop itself from using it. I'd like the EU or China to force the Cali companies to stop spying on people as well. TikTok 's ubiquitousness, similar to CZcams or FB, could allow you to use multiple breaches to target at-risk groups like Journalists wherever they go. Since odds are, nearly everywhere they go will have someone with the app installed that could be used to piggyback.
There will always be holes in phone security that allow apps to run microphones or cameras without alerting the user. There were some big 0-day patches earlier this year for multiple GPS apps for exactly that. The Internet of Things that we have built just means that even things seemingly innocuous to one person, can be deeply harmful to another.
Exactly. Weird how nobody's concerned that Google and Facebook make massive profits off of selling our data to companies in all corners of the globe.
You know California is not a foreign entity right?
Facebook is bad. The ccp is worse.
They needed to mandate that what info is being sent from the app is unobfuscated and transparent, without blanket terms. But as usual, the govt f’ed it up.
2:31 As a European (German) I had a good laugh here (Patriot Act, Freedom Act, Save Harbor Deal, Could Act)
Hey Legal Eagle! I would like to see you do "Laws Broken" in Taken 3. The way the evidence-eating detective at the end just let's him go is hilarious!
There is no company in China that doesn't operate at the largesse of the CCP. Not a single one. Operating under the assumption that data within ByteDance's infrastructure can or is able to be used and abused by the CCP is not an unreasonable position.
How could the CPC use my data in any way that affects me? It's not like Google et al don't gladly hand over every single piece of information to the government that I live under that is capable of sending militarized police to detain (or worse) me at any time.
as if the NSA isn't reading and classifying everything you do online lol (even mails)
@@icantcomeupwithnames469 I wouldn't say it can't...but it's more than likely to use it against the US government. Who likes to keep that sort of information to themselves. You're assuming this is being done for the safety of citizens.
@@Nixeu42 I don't even know how the CPC could use my information against the American regime, but if there's any other information they want, they're free to contact me whenever.
@@Kapi.23 Whataboutism. There's plenty to talk about with American social media companies too, but that's not what's being discussed here.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't Near v. Minnesota take precedence in this situation since the government can't ban speech based on national security reasons unless actively calling for violence, breaking the law, etc.
I thought that the Bruen decision by SCOTUS ruled the balancing test invalid. When determining if a law violates the constitution you can only consider "text, history and tradition." What the text says and how it was enforce when it was enacted.
One thing I'm sure of is that if it doesn't survive the court challenge that there will be another iteration of the law to address such concerns, whether it's broader or narrower, or both.
Wait, you think Congress will further regulate data privacy? Because everything about our history suggests that they will use this law as an excuse for why they don’t need to pass any actual protections for Americans.
"We support the free market! So long as we get to decide what's in the free market."
Unless the free market rejects what the owner class wants people to do ....
Same for huawei
Moderation in everything is a wise course
You do realize that its a psuedo free market. You literally can not sell snake oil in protection of consumers
@@gasan6599 Probably good that we banned Huawei, considering the geopolitical realities of the modern world.
11:05 Aww, I thought this was an ad segue 😄
The actual seque was way better 😂
@LegalEagle Waiting on your video for the Scarlett Johansson - OpenAI case, looking thoroughly at both sides of the issue.
This is what happens when you have people that couldnt set the clock on their VCR in the 80s making decisions about cutting edge technology.
This^
With all the dinosaurs in Congress, it’s woefully easy for tech lobbyists to exploit their ignorance of the Big Scary Internet with fear-mongering bs about its supposed dangers.
Federal Communications Commission can place restrictions on HOW you communicate. Restriction on spectrum and radio frequency equipment. The USPS can also restrict what you can send through the mail.
There are some important difference though. Without restrictions and frequency regulations what is there to stop someone from jamming things? If I install a high powered jammer that makes the whole neighborhood a dead zone for RF what would be the legal basis for making me stop?
@@MorbidEel Public nuisance laws, probably.
When Montana and Idaho tried to ban ticktock they were hauled up short by the federal courts for first amendment and bill of attainder violations. If the U.S can declare national security violations for this, they can declare anything is a national security violation. Thing is, U.S. companies hold more information about Americans than anyone else and anyone can buy it if they want it. The argument against ticktock makes no sense whatsoever. Which they are currently making in federal court.
What I found the most strange on the issue of Tiktok that us politicians bring up is
many of the issues the bring up with it also affect US companies in the exact same way except
that the country in question is the U.S. instead of China.
For example the Patriot Act allows for the U.S. to request data from U.S. companies with the
companies being able that they have been breached by the US.
Remember all that craziness that Tom Green did on MTV back in the 90s that was definitely inappropriate for teens/kids? ... the world before the internet was just as crazy when it comes to expression
My first thought was that I might have found another fan of _The Red Green Show._ Which, while not that insane, definitely has some ideas that one should never try in reality. Alas, _The Tom Green Show_ was something entirely different, and came three years after it started. Which, since Tom Green is also Canadian, might have been deliberate.
The Red Green Show is legendary
Exactly. Banning a social media app because you don't like people doing ridiculous stuff for arbitrary reasons is... about the most unamerican thing I can think of.
The ban is limited to the US. And only to official stores. Anyone will still be able to access the app through an APK download.
Also, the ban is limited to the USA. The rest of the world will see no effect from this ban besides possibly some US accounts going under.
Thing is, ByteDance will NOT sell.
And apk download provides more opportunity for viruses and malware
@@gasan6599 Which is amusing given what viruses and malware can do and some of the places it might originate from…
Or just access foreign versions of the app via a VPN, or sidrload it with a VPN.
Google is not stupid man. They know when youre using a vpn to get around the app store geo requirements. @@sharniek002
Depends on how far the government and Bytedance go, they could geolock it which would mean you would need a rooted phone to spoof your GPS location
A good video to make might be a response to the switch joy cons case being dismissed some people are going around saying the lawyers made all the money, seems like a good talking point for your channel, how much do the lawyers get and how much work did they have to do.
States/cities tried to ban the beetles from playing in their areas because it was offensive, dangerous, etc. Those people are mostly in office now.
That judge really said “you’re wrong at best racist at worst” 💀
Thank you for your videos.
loving the My Cousing Vinnie reference: yutes
Do a video on UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
STEVEN DUARTE, AKA Short
What I find hilarious about the data protection issues is how many countries now have rules about what can be hosted in the US or controlled directly by a US company (instead of through a local company owned by the US company)
"Expressive conduct" should not be confused with "violent, suicidal, or dangerous acts."
TikTok doesn't do these things. It lets people post videos of themselves doing those things, and sharing those videos is an expressive act.
As someone who knows a lot more about tech, hardware, Internet, and software than most, the people who tend to be the most vocal about there distrust of data collected from big companies, also tend to be the ones who know the least about the subject.
That being said this isn't just about data collection. It's about a Chinese company collecting data. It's honestly a valid concern, but the entire process/investigation is pretty messed up it seems. I have no idea what kind of information tiktok provided to prove they aren't giving info to the Chinese government, but it should be pretty easy to prove one way or the other. Doesn't seem like this is a subject being handled by informed, level headed people...
How many ppl have stories of friends trying to get them to eat dog poop (and actually claim to have eaten dog poop) from long before TikTok and the Internet were a thing? Cuz uh, I've talked to several ppl that have stories specifically about that topic (although only one person said they actually did it - and I'm not sure if I believe them).
It's also worth noting that you could probably quite easily compile a similar list from just about every social media website - including CZcams. Even the Ice Bucket Challenge wasn't actually safe - if someone had a heart condition they weren't aware of, that could have resulted in a heart attack (and maybe it did and we just never heard about it cuz the video never got uploaded).
It'd be great if the discussion around it forces the real reason to come to light. A more general user data protection law would adversely effect their own data collection, so they don't want to create such a sweeping law, and it's only natural for them to assume that an app owned by someone in another nation is doing the same thing as all the ones owned within the US. Whether it actually is or not isn't yet known. Some evidence that they're providing user data to China would likely already have been presented at this point if they had that.
Personally I would prefer that no apps collect data for _any_ governments without explicit warrants for that data on a case by case basis after somebody becomes a suspect of a crime, and that selling user data to advertisers should require an explicit opt-in consent by the users to personalize their incoming ads for them. In general, all people _should_ have an inherent right to privacy.
The government doesn't have to collect data if it can just buy the data collected by private companies. It is probably easier too. I believe performing surveillance requires stuff like warrants or other documents through the courts. Simply buying the data would not need that. It is also cheaper because the government won't have to maintain the infrastructure for the data collection.
Glad to hear your voice back
IDK maybe instead of writing a rediculous law to ban a singular company maybe they should have written a few to directly address the problems they claim to have with it!
Lie： For security! Reality: For money
7:06 this graphic is top notch! I had to pause because I laughed so hard
I now await the Legal Eagle Ryan McBeth collab video, to discuss this specific subject.
Ryan MacBeth is a terrible person and a liar.
Each state does NOT have their own data privacy law. They may have breach notification laws or cyber laws, but not data privacy laws. Only a handful of states have that. - a currently practicing data privacy lawyer
How about just creating an actually decent data protection law that would apply to TikTok, as well as Meta, Google and X and solve a lot of problems in one constitutionally protected stroke?
God-forbid the US creates data protection laws that'd apply to any issue caused by the CCP's involvement in ByteDance and actually help people
Problem is those laws would stop them from spying on the American people, so that’s not going to happen.
THe idea of an America-only version of tiktok should be a huge red flag for the government. They need to look into what happens to china-only versions of video games and see why it such a bad idea. Granted I think some coservatives would love the idea of an america-only version because they would be able to control the narratives easily
And that's what's scary. Our goverment is trying to do what we constantly criticize other nations, such asChina, for doing.
It's not just conservatives. Have you ever met a "moral vegan?"
@@thomasbecker9676 I am vegan for moral reasons. But I don't understand what you are implying. Can you please explain?
@@thomasbecker9676
Vegans aren’t trying to enshrine their moral values into law. As far as I know anyway.
You know what the funny thing is? Tiktok is banned in China. They have their own version called Douyin. What's the American version gonna be called? Can't believe America and China are going down the same path. Do we need to use a VPN like what they do in China to access Tiktok.
@ 19:00 almost like China already does by requiring any foreign company operating in China to be "partnered" with a Chinese company to be allowed to do anything there. Go read up on why/how Tencent has become the largest "game studio" holding company in the world just the last 10 years.
China has a brilliant strategy to help develop its industries and markets. If a foreign company wants to do business with China's 1.4 billion people, then it must partner with a Chinese company and have a technologies swap. This way Chinese industries develop and these foreign companies make money. Foreign companies don't have an inherent right to have access to the market of another country and are free to decline doing business if China's price is too rich for them. Most companies have decided that having access to China's market is worth a technologies swap. Some haven't. None of this is nefarious or even secret. Nor is it "theft". It's a mutually agreed upon contractual clause. Please keep eating those sour grapes.
That transition into rocket money was brutal!
Love your analysis. Informative and entertaining
It sounds to me like a rehashing of the Red Scare...The TikTok scare!
It's a one-two punch of the ol' red scare _and_ some yellow peril for good measure.
except its true… they DO have and use your data
That’s exactly what it is.
‘bUt tHeY cAn MaNiPuLaTe tHe AlGorHythM!,!? To do what? Attempt a coup? Oh wait, that was Twitter and Facebook.
They’ve already given away the gig. They can’t control the narrative (on Israel). A bill pushed by APAC.
@@bullpup1337 You might want to look into Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and 5 EYES before you start saying stupid shit like you are right now.
@@Theo-oh3jk I know about them. Not sure how that contradicts anything I said?
I had no idea Facebook was still that big. It's not only the top in the world, but the Messenger part itself has an extra billion users, putting the total number 1.5 billion higher than CZcams. I wonder how many of those accounts are inactive like mine is.