Selection of quotes:

This is despite the fact that it has been well-established law for almost 60 years that U.S. people have a First Amendment right to receive foreign propaganda.

The law limits liability to intermediaries—entities that “provide services to distribute, maintain, or update” TikTok by means of a marketplace, or that provide internet hosting services to enable the app’s distribution, maintenance, or updating. The law also makes intermediaries responsible for its implementation.

The law explicitly denies to the Attorney General the authority to enforce it against an individual user of a foreign adversary controlled application, so users themselves cannot be held liable for continuing to use the application, if they can access it.

Enacting this legislation has undermined this long standing, democratic principle. It has also undermined the U.S. government’s moral authority to call out other nations for when they shut down internet access or ban social media apps and other online communications tools.

Our lawmakers should work to protect data privacy, but this was the wrong approach. They should prevent any company—regardless of where it is based—from collecting massive amounts of our detailed personal data, which is then made available to data brokers, U.S. government agencies, and even foreign adversaries.

Thoughts?

  • remotelove@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Sure, if you exclude that this situation is extremely conditional, may involve years of legal precedent after similar cases went to the supreme court and impacts millions of Americans.

    But yeah. Just ignore those small things and a baby could figure this out.

    • TachyonTele
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s a foreign state owned social media app. Try again.

      • remotelove@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, I pointed that out.

        I am curious though. Do you know what the word "precedent’ means? Have you had any exposure to any legal system?

              • remotelove@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Hardware is not an app and executive orders are not laws that affect everyone in the US.

                You really don’t understand any of the context around this, do you?

                • TachyonTele
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Oh you read all of that in five minutes, did you?

                  You seriously think tick-tock is the only app to ever be banned? Are you in middle school or something?

                  • remotelove@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Oh you read all of that in five minutes, did you?

                    You couldn’t? It’s a couple of tables.

                    Again, you aren’t seeing the context of the problem and the entire scope of what is going on. It’s the nature of the software that is in question and what it does for the end user. (The last time I checked, Kaspersky didn’t make communications software.)

                    This discussion is pointless. Goodbye.