7 ms·

Yeah. Ban TikTok, have an American company make a clone. Why is this insanity allowed ? China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Why do we allow our strate

Yeah. Ban TikTok, have an American company make a clone. Why is this insanity allowed ? China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Why do we allow our strategic enemy to have software on our phones? End this madness. Stop the sale of Chinese tech in the West, period. It’s all backdoored. (if you think they are interested in “co-living” go talk to the Kremlin on how that went. China is bidding its time but their intention is to end US dominance. They tell us this and they release papers on how they intend to do it. If you think that’s ok, great. I don’t see how a democratic rule of law country, flaws as it may have, being replaced by a brutal dictatorship, is a good option).

ironSkillet 4y ago
Agreed...I don't understand why this isn't an obvious thing all of congress would get behind. Change the law if necessary.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  Because the statutory (not to mention constitutional) implications are staggering: what about our government's structure do you think gives it the authority to outright ban social media companies? Do you want it to have that power, or do you just want to government to casuistically ban the things you think should be banned? Note: this is entirely independent from whether TikTok is bad, which I'm more confident than not it is. But contorting our already contorted national security laws around it is not a tenable solution.
  - gjsman-1000 4y ago
    “Do you want it to have that power” What an odd question. The government bans things all the time - can you go and buy unpasteurized milk right now? Or walk into a weapons store and buy brass knuckles? But heaven forbid, we’re abandoning our principles if we ban a data collection platform owned and operated by a genocidal undemocratic government.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Of course the government bans things all the time. The question is of kind: unpasteurized milk and brass knuckles exist in regulatory environments that don't meaningfully impinge upon civil liberties. It's not even clear what statute you'd use to "ban" TikTok. Is it a national security risk?
      - shrewduser 4y ago
        it is a national risk but i imagine there's also economic / trade grounds in the fact that china doesn't let american companies compete in their market. I don't see any reason for it not to be in the purview of government.
        woodruffw 4y ago
        It is in the purview of the government. That's not the question; the statutory justification for a ban is the question. Every single country on this planet of ours engages in some form of protectionism, whether we like it or not: again, it isn't clear what casuistic justification explains singling out China's protectionism, and even then banning just one company involved in it. Italy doesn't let us sell the sawdust we call "Parmesan," but I'd prefer it if we didn't ban selling the real thing in retaliation. Finally, for the national risk: what, precisely is the national risk? You can argue (correctly!) that they're a bad actor given this news, and I would be more than happy to see those involved in the surveillance of journalists see the inside of a court. But this doesn't even come close to meeting the standard for a national security risk, weak as that standard has become.
  - mannerheim 4y ago
    You don't need to ban it. Just forbid US companies from doing business with TikTok, and their users will plummet when they can't pay for CDNs in America.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Thanks for actually answering the question! Frankly, I wouldn't mind if this happens. I just wish we wouldn't swing "national security" around as the cudgel.
    - MisterMower 4y ago
      We should tax downloading and using the app. Maybe show some warning labels and horrific photos of what the app can do to you if you use it too much. Ban its use in certain areas. It worked for limiting cigarette use and TikTok is at least as bad for you. I think it’s worth a try and the legal precedence is already there.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    The Constitution plainly gives Congress the power and right to regulate international trade.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Yes. What isn't clear is whether that statutory authority even approaches being empowered to ban companies that figure centrally in public expression.
- pesfandiar 4y ago
  It seems we're sliding into a new cold war, but the US is still contemplating its strategy. Banning a vastly successful social media outright needs to be aligned with that strategy, and not to mention how unpopular taking away an addictive app would be with the voters.
natelegler 4y ago
100% this.
Xeoncross 4y ago
It's not even tikTok really, it's WeChat or any other CCP monitored social media company. I'd love to have a tikTok not controlled by the CCP (or KGB for that matter). You know, a platform where saying something against the government doesn't result in prison time or death.
- Adraghast 4y ago
  The KGB has not existed for decades. If you’re going to make inflammatory statements, you should make sure you’re talking about the correct things.
  - gjsman-1000 4y ago
    Well this is naive - the KGB lives on with the same agents, same files, same buildings, same crimes - it’s just now called the FSB.
    - Adraghast 4y ago
      Perhaps you thought me under the impression Russia hasn’t had a state security service since the USSR collapsed, but obviously I know that. The point is that one can better cloak the warmed over Cold War paranoia they’re peddling under the guise of knowing what they’re talking about if they avoid warmed over Cold War terminology.
      - LarryMullins 4y ago
        For my part, I still insist on calling British soldiers "red coats".
      - mannerheim 4y ago
        Is it Cold War paranoia when Russia is currently engaged in the invasion of another country?
        LarryMullins 4y ago
partiallypro 4y ago
I actually liked the Trump method, which was to force them to sell the US arm to a US company and sever it from the Chinese. I don't know why that never came to fruition; it looked like it was nearly a done deal (Microsoft was the leading bidder.) Making a competitor from scratch would just open up the userbase to another state actor, though it could give a window for a Vine return.
- idontpost 4y ago
  [dead]
- mannerheim 4y ago
  Activist judge blocked the sanctions on TikTok.
- Bud 4y ago
  Except that this story reveals the obvious reason this wouldn't work. How do you reliably keep that US "arm" from being co-opted? How do you make sure that the software isn't phoning home to China regardless of what the US arm does? Oracle and Walmart reportedly at that time brokered a deal to run the US arm of TikTok. Do you trust them? Walmart certainly isn't politically neutral, by any stretch. Meanwhile, Larry Ellison was a leading figure in the effort to subvert the 2020 election. He was on the Nov. 14 election subversion planning call, along with "Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.); Fox News host Sean Hannity; Jay Sekulow, an attorney for President Donald Trump; and James Bopp Jr., an attorney for True the Vote, a Texas-based nonprofit that has promoted disputed claims of widespread voter fraud." (source: WaPo) This doesn't seem like a solid plan, to put it rather mildly.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    The US Government already trusts Oracle Corp with much more than merely a social media application. https://www.oracle.com/industries/government/us-defense/ https://www.oracle.com/industries/government/us-defense/ Larry Ellison defecting to China doesn't seem like a likely scenario, I don't think he'd like life as an international fugitive, slave to a host with a history of treating their own native billionaires harshly. Barring such a flight, the US Government can get their hands on him if that becomes necessary, but I doubt it will.
bayindirh 4y ago
When US bans something to protect itself, that’s OK, but when another country does it, it’s a suppression of free speech and freedoms and whatnot. Doesn’t this sound a bit off?
- idontpost 4y ago
  [dead]
- adamsmith143 4y ago
  Intent matters. The reason why China bans foreign social media is much different than the reason we would want to ban TikTok.
- medellin 4y ago
  Little different when the CCP is ok the board of the company and controls its decisions. Look at what happened to Didi when they did one thing without consent from them. I don’t think you are comparing the same things.
- bioemerl 4y ago
  Does anyone consider the EU passing all sorts of data privacy laws and putting regulations on American companies as censorship? No, just regular protectionism and it doesn't get too much flack. The problem with China is that they are actually suppressing free speech and freedoms and whatnot. Do you disagree that this is the case?
- imperfect_blue 4y ago
  Tit-for-tat makes perfect sense from a game theory point of view, even ignoring the egregious abuse of data for nefarious purposes by the CCP.
- acchow 4y ago
  If China decided to ban a US company for using its app to locate Chinese citizens, I'd say that is totally fair.
  - 4y ago
TaylorAlexander 4y ago
To me this doesn’t really address the bigger picture. Why is this tracking even possible? Why don’t we build better security in to our products? Is it because US companies built their business on this same type of tracking? Perhaps that’s the issue we should fix.
jacquesm 4y ago
> Why do we allow our strategic enemy to have software on our phones? They make the phones. What makes you trust the hardware in the first place?
- kranke155 4y ago
  That’s exactly my point. Apple moving some production to India (or so I read) is a good first step. Western production moved to China due to Chinese strategic efforts to locate our industrial production there. We should have our own strategic effort of our own to reverse that.
  - DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
    This is rewriting history. Production moved to China because China began allowing foreign investment, and Chinese labor was cheaper. Foreign companies made their own decisions to take advantage of cheap Chinese labor. This wasn't some sort of nefarious Chinese plot. The US also wanted China to open up to American investment.
    - kranke155 4y ago
      China made a large effort to woo western companies to manufacture there. Afaik they built special economic zones, it was a deliberate effort by the govt. If it all happened by accident then why didn’t manufacturing move to India? Both China and India moved to the GATT at the same time afaik.
      - lmm 4y ago
        Manufacturing didn't move to India largely because their quality wasn't good enough. There's no need to make it more complicated than that.
      - DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
        Of course China tried to attract foreign investment. Describing that as > Chinese strategic efforts to locate our industrial production there makes it sound like some sort of conspiracy to undermine the US. It was normal economic policy, of the type practiced by most countries.
h4x0rr 4y ago
I mean can you really call it democratic when there are only two parties and the citizens have basically no power? https://youtu.be/U6w9CbemhVY https://youtu.be/U6w9CbemhVY
treeman79 4y ago
Bribes, lots of bribes. Trump called for Tik Tok to be banned. He was mocked for it.
- kranke155 4y ago
  Fine great let’s just agree Trump got it right and end this.
h4x0rr 4y ago
I mean there are already two american tiktok clones: insta reels and YouTube shorts
- kranke155 4y ago
  Great. Then kill it, then kill any company with Chinese origin that won’t open source it’s hardware and software to the US Government.
  - HDThoreaun 4y ago
    The American clones are garbage. The problem with protectionism is it leads to less competition and therefore worse products. If you want apps to stop tracking people just make it illegal for apps to tracks people. Country of origin is irrelelvant.
    - not2b 4y ago
      But the business models of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Google Search are all based on tracking people.
    - h4x0rr 4y ago
      I aggree, it's a much more pragmatic solution. But do you really think the CCP would follow this rule?
      - DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
        The CCP doesn't have anything to do with it. TikTok would have to follow the rule, just like any other company.
        h4x0rr 4y ago
        CCP is part of bytedance and it's more than likely they'll follow government requests. The OP was about journalists, not regular users mind you. Edit: CCP has a committee inside of ByteDance. Also CCP has power over all chinese companies. (Wanted to answer that to the subcomment but there is no answer button)
FpUser 4y ago
>"China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Why do we allow our strategic enemy to have software on our phones?" I agree with this. Things should be reciprocal. I do not think China is the enemy though. More like a strategic competitor. Trading with the enemy is a crime, right? >"(if you think they are interested in “co-living” go talk to the Kremlin on how that went" Why do you equate China with Kremlin? I think China is way smarter and has managed huge economical achievements while Putin is pissing away immense potential that Russia has. If we talk about co-living it is the US that after WWII was attacking and wrecking numerous countries killing directly and indirectly millions. China so far has harassed its own population only and has yet to do anything even remotely approaching what the US has done on international scale. >"China is bidding its time but their intention is to end US dominance." Now here comes the real reason. The US dominance - you sure this is what the rest of the world wants? How about we try without subservients to a single country. >"I don’t see how a democratic rule of law country, flaws as it may have, being replaced by a brutal dictatorship, is a good option" Nobody wants that. But it is the US (and allies) that keeps taking away more rights and freedoms. If you compare for example 90s and now people look more and more like cattle. You can't blame China for that. I think somebody else is responsible.
RobotToaster 4y ago
>China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Not entirely true, they just have to follow Chinese law if operating within China, but they mostly refuse to. For instance facebook wasn't blocked in China until 2009, when it refused to release information on suspected terrorists. You can argue those laws US companies would have to follow in China ae wrong, but they are still applied more-or-less evenly. If you want to respond in kind then make privacy laws that Chinese companies would find difficult to follow, but are none-the-less applied evenly. >if you think they are interested in “co-living” go talk to the Kremlin on how that went. China is bidding its time but their intention is to end US dominance. It's interesting that Americans consider "co-living" to mean continuation of US domination.
- kranke155 4y ago
  Why do we have to follow the Chinese example? If an app is a National security threat, as TikTok is being proven to be by every revelation, then ban it. Why do we hold ourselves up as “we have to follow the standard”? Standards are defined by previous action, and it’s by acting that we alter the course of reality. Also, I’m not American. I just read history enough to know that there’s always a dominant country in world affairs. And I know I wouldn’t choose a brutal Chinese authoritarian regime to lead us into the next century.
powerapple 4y ago
China allows western social networks abided with its domestic laws, and so does US. They just have different laws.

ironSkillet 4y ago

Agreed...I don't understand why this isn't an obvious thing all of congress would get behind. Change the law if necessary.

woodruffw 4y ago
Because the statutory (not to mention constitutional) implications are staggering: what about our government's structure do you think gives it the authority to outright ban social media companies? Do you want it to have that power, or do you just want to government to casuistically ban the things you think should be banned? Note: this is entirely independent from whether TikTok is bad, which I'm more confident than not it is. But contorting our already contorted national security laws around it is not a tenable solution.
- gjsman-1000 4y ago
  “Do you want it to have that power” What an odd question. The government bans things all the time - can you go and buy unpasteurized milk right now? Or walk into a weapons store and buy brass knuckles? But heaven forbid, we’re abandoning our principles if we ban a data collection platform owned and operated by a genocidal undemocratic government.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Of course the government bans things all the time. The question is of kind: unpasteurized milk and brass knuckles exist in regulatory environments that don't meaningfully impinge upon civil liberties. It's not even clear what statute you'd use to "ban" TikTok. Is it a national security risk?
    - shrewduser 4y ago
      it is a national risk but i imagine there's also economic / trade grounds in the fact that china doesn't let american companies compete in their market. I don't see any reason for it not to be in the purview of government.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        It is in the purview of the government. That's not the question; the statutory justification for a ban is the question. Every single country on this planet of ours engages in some form of protectionism, whether we like it or not: again, it isn't clear what casuistic justification explains singling out China's protectionism, and even then banning just one company involved in it. Italy doesn't let us sell the sawdust we call "Parmesan," but I'd prefer it if we didn't ban selling the real thing in retaliation. Finally, for the national risk: what, precisely is the national risk? You can argue (correctly!) that they're a bad actor given this news, and I would be more than happy to see those involved in the surveillance of journalists see the inside of a court. But this doesn't even come close to meeting the standard for a national security risk, weak as that standard has become.
- mannerheim 4y ago
  You don't need to ban it. Just forbid US companies from doing business with TikTok, and their users will plummet when they can't pay for CDNs in America.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Thanks for actually answering the question! Frankly, I wouldn't mind if this happens. I just wish we wouldn't swing "national security" around as the cudgel.
  - MisterMower 4y ago
    We should tax downloading and using the app. Maybe show some warning labels and horrific photos of what the app can do to you if you use it too much. Ban its use in certain areas. It worked for limiting cigarette use and TikTok is at least as bad for you. I think it’s worth a try and the legal precedence is already there.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  The Constitution plainly gives Congress the power and right to regulate international trade.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Yes. What isn't clear is whether that statutory authority even approaches being empowered to ban companies that figure centrally in public expression.
pesfandiar 4y ago
It seems we're sliding into a new cold war, but the US is still contemplating its strategy. Banning a vastly successful social media outright needs to be aligned with that strategy, and not to mention how unpopular taking away an addictive app would be with the voters.

natelegler 4y ago

100% this.

Xeoncross 4y ago

It's not even tikTok really, it's WeChat or any other CCP monitored social media company. I'd love to have a tikTok not controlled by the CCP (or KGB for that matter). You know, a platform where saying something against the government doesn't result in prison time or death.

Adraghast 4y ago
The KGB has not existed for decades. If you’re going to make inflammatory statements, you should make sure you’re talking about the correct things.
- gjsman-1000 4y ago
  Well this is naive - the KGB lives on with the same agents, same files, same buildings, same crimes - it’s just now called the FSB.
  - Adraghast 4y ago
    Perhaps you thought me under the impression Russia hasn’t had a state security service since the USSR collapsed, but obviously I know that. The point is that one can better cloak the warmed over Cold War paranoia they’re peddling under the guise of knowing what they’re talking about if they avoid warmed over Cold War terminology.
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      For my part, I still insist on calling British soldiers "red coats".
    - mannerheim 4y ago
      Is it Cold War paranoia when Russia is currently engaged in the invasion of another country?
      - LarryMullins 4y ago

partiallypro 4y ago

I actually liked the Trump method, which was to force them to sell the US arm to a US company and sever it from the Chinese. I don't know why that never came to fruition; it looked like it was nearly a done deal (Microsoft was the leading bidder.) Making a competitor from scratch would just open up the userbase to another state actor, though it could give a window for a Vine return.

idontpost 4y ago
[dead]
mannerheim 4y ago
Activist judge blocked the sanctions on TikTok.
Bud 4y ago
Except that this story reveals the obvious reason this wouldn't work. How do you reliably keep that US "arm" from being co-opted? How do you make sure that the software isn't phoning home to China regardless of what the US arm does? Oracle and Walmart reportedly at that time brokered a deal to run the US arm of TikTok. Do you trust them? Walmart certainly isn't politically neutral, by any stretch. Meanwhile, Larry Ellison was a leading figure in the effort to subvert the 2020 election. He was on the Nov. 14 election subversion planning call, along with "Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.); Fox News host Sean Hannity; Jay Sekulow, an attorney for President Donald Trump; and James Bopp Jr., an attorney for True the Vote, a Texas-based nonprofit that has promoted disputed claims of widespread voter fraud." (source: WaPo) This doesn't seem like a solid plan, to put it rather mildly.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  The US Government already trusts Oracle Corp with much more than merely a social media application. https://www.oracle.com/industries/government/us-defense/ https://www.oracle.com/industries/government/us-defense/ Larry Ellison defecting to China doesn't seem like a likely scenario, I don't think he'd like life as an international fugitive, slave to a host with a history of treating their own native billionaires harshly. Barring such a flight, the US Government can get their hands on him if that becomes necessary, but I doubt it will.

bayindirh 4y ago

When US bans something to protect itself, that’s OK, but when another country does it, it’s a suppression of free speech and freedoms and whatnot. Doesn’t this sound a bit off?

idontpost 4y ago
[dead]
adamsmith143 4y ago
Intent matters. The reason why China bans foreign social media is much different than the reason we would want to ban TikTok.
medellin 4y ago
Little different when the CCP is ok the board of the company and controls its decisions. Look at what happened to Didi when they did one thing without consent from them. I don’t think you are comparing the same things.
bioemerl 4y ago
Does anyone consider the EU passing all sorts of data privacy laws and putting regulations on American companies as censorship? No, just regular protectionism and it doesn't get too much flack. The problem with China is that they are actually suppressing free speech and freedoms and whatnot. Do you disagree that this is the case?
imperfect_blue 4y ago
Tit-for-tat makes perfect sense from a game theory point of view, even ignoring the egregious abuse of data for nefarious purposes by the CCP.
acchow 4y ago
If China decided to ban a US company for using its app to locate Chinese citizens, I'd say that is totally fair.
- 4y ago

TaylorAlexander 4y ago

To me this doesn’t really address the bigger picture. Why is this tracking even possible? Why don’t we build better security in to our products? Is it because US companies built their business on this same type of tracking? Perhaps that’s the issue we should fix.

jacquesm 4y ago

> Why do we allow our strategic enemy to have software on our phones? They make the phones. What makes you trust the hardware in the first place?

kranke155 4y ago
That’s exactly my point. Apple moving some production to India (or so I read) is a good first step. Western production moved to China due to Chinese strategic efforts to locate our industrial production there. We should have our own strategic effort of our own to reverse that.
- DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
  This is rewriting history. Production moved to China because China began allowing foreign investment, and Chinese labor was cheaper. Foreign companies made their own decisions to take advantage of cheap Chinese labor. This wasn't some sort of nefarious Chinese plot. The US also wanted China to open up to American investment.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    China made a large effort to woo western companies to manufacture there. Afaik they built special economic zones, it was a deliberate effort by the govt. If it all happened by accident then why didn’t manufacturing move to India? Both China and India moved to the GATT at the same time afaik.
    - lmm 4y ago
      Manufacturing didn't move to India largely because their quality wasn't good enough. There's no need to make it more complicated than that.
    - DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
      Of course China tried to attract foreign investment. Describing that as > Chinese strategic efforts to locate our industrial production there makes it sound like some sort of conspiracy to undermine the US. It was normal economic policy, of the type practiced by most countries.

h4x0rr 4y ago

I mean can you really call it democratic when there are only two parties and the citizens have basically no power? https://youtu.be/U6w9CbemhVY https://youtu.be/U6w9CbemhVY

treeman79 4y ago

Bribes, lots of bribes. Trump called for Tik Tok to be banned. He was mocked for it.

kranke155 4y ago
Fine great let’s just agree Trump got it right and end this.

h4x0rr 4y ago

I mean there are already two american tiktok clones: insta reels and YouTube shorts

kranke155 4y ago
Great. Then kill it, then kill any company with Chinese origin that won’t open source it’s hardware and software to the US Government.
- HDThoreaun 4y ago
  The American clones are garbage. The problem with protectionism is it leads to less competition and therefore worse products. If you want apps to stop tracking people just make it illegal for apps to tracks people. Country of origin is irrelelvant.
  - not2b 4y ago
    But the business models of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Google Search are all based on tracking people.
  - h4x0rr 4y ago
    I aggree, it's a much more pragmatic solution. But do you really think the CCP would follow this rule?
    - DiogenesKynikos 4y ago
      The CCP doesn't have anything to do with it. TikTok would have to follow the rule, just like any other company.
      - h4x0rr 4y ago
        CCP is part of bytedance and it's more than likely they'll follow government requests. The OP was about journalists, not regular users mind you. Edit: CCP has a committee inside of ByteDance. Also CCP has power over all chinese companies. (Wanted to answer that to the subcomment but there is no answer button)

FpUser 4y ago

>"China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Why do we allow our strategic enemy to have software on our phones?" I agree with this. Things should be reciprocal. I do not think China is the enemy though. More like a strategic competitor. Trading with the enemy is a crime, right? >"(if you think they are interested in “co-living” go talk to the Kremlin on how that went" Why do you equate China with Kremlin? I think China is way smarter and has managed huge economical achievements while Putin is pissing away immense potential that Russia has. If we talk about co-living it is the US that after WWII was attacking and wrecking numerous countries killing directly and indirectly millions. China so far has harassed its own population only and has yet to do anything even remotely approaching what the US has done on international scale. >"China is bidding its time but their intention is to end US dominance." Now here comes the real reason. The US dominance - you sure this is what the rest of the world wants? How about we try without subservients to a single country. >"I don’t see how a democratic rule of law country, flaws as it may have, being replaced by a brutal dictatorship, is a good option" Nobody wants that. But it is the US (and allies) that keeps taking away more rights and freedoms. If you compare for example 90s and now people look more and more like cattle. You can't blame China for that. I think somebody else is responsible.

RobotToaster 4y ago

>China doesn’t allow Western social networks. Not entirely true, they just have to follow Chinese law if operating within China, but they mostly refuse to. For instance facebook wasn't blocked in China until 2009, when it refused to release information on suspected terrorists. You can argue those laws US companies would have to follow in China ae wrong, but they are still applied more-or-less evenly. If you want to respond in kind then make privacy laws that Chinese companies would find difficult to follow, but are none-the-less applied evenly. >if you think they are interested in “co-living” go talk to the Kremlin on how that went. China is bidding its time but their intention is to end US dominance. It's interesting that Americans consider "co-living" to mean continuation of US domination.

kranke155 4y ago
Why do we have to follow the Chinese example? If an app is a National security threat, as TikTok is being proven to be by every revelation, then ban it. Why do we hold ourselves up as “we have to follow the standard”? Standards are defined by previous action, and it’s by acting that we alter the course of reality. Also, I’m not American. I just read history enough to know that there’s always a dominant country in world affairs. And I know I wouldn’t choose a brutal Chinese authoritarian regime to lead us into the next century.

powerapple 4y ago

China allows western social networks abided with its domestic laws, and so does US. They just have different laws.