5 ms·

Are national security arguments not legal? My understanding was that Chinese Tech companies are required by law to serve as (willing or unwilling) arms of the d

Are national security arguments not legal? My understanding was that Chinese Tech companies are required by law to serve as (willing or unwilling) arms of the domestic spy agency in China.

johngalt_ 3y ago
Same as in the US.
bogwog 3y ago
If the data collected on TikTok is a national security issue, that would be a good admission since it would mean we'd have to pass some actual privacy laws in this country. Facebook/Google/Microsoft/etc collect the same kind of data, and their revenues are not as important to protect as our national security (I assume).
Gormo 3y ago
> Are national security arguments not legal? Arguments aren't a source of law, and what's permissible in legislation is defined by the constitution.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  > what's permissible in legislation is defined by the constitution. Oh, sweet, summer child.
- falcolas 3y ago
  The constitution and the dozens of dozens of interpretations of the constitution by way of case law rendered by the supreme court. Reading the full text of the constitution won't do much but put you a toe past the starting line in understanding what is and is not "constitutional" in the US.
marcosdumay 3y ago
If there are no clear rules, no, it's not legal (by definition, "law" is a set of clear rules). If you decide that "no Chinese social network is allowed", you can create a law for that. But the TikTok ban is not like this.
- stale2002 3y ago
  If you care, you can find the clear rules here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RESTRICT_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RESTRICT_Act Impact to the country's critical infrastructure and digital economy, "Sabotage or subversion" of ICTS in the United States Interference and manipulation of federal elections Undermining the democratic process to "steer policy and regulatory decisions in favor of the strategic objectives of a foreign adversary to the detriment of the national security of the United States".
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rchaud 3y ago
National security arguments can only go so far without falling afoul of Constitutional principles. Earlier versions of this bill failed because their breadth made it clear it could be used in situations not involving China or other 'bad' tech actors. A blanket ban on "Chinese tech" is immeasurably broad, and would harm legitimate business interests. Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle stop doing business in the country if they're selling products and services to Chinese tech firms? Correspondingly, Tencent has holdings in many American companies, Reddit and Twitter being two. Should Reddit be forced to buy out their holdings?
- digging 3y ago
  > Correspondingly, Tencent has holdings in many American companies, Reddit and Twitter being two. Should Reddit be forced to buy out their holdings? I mean, yeah maybe. If there's a real national security risk it would make sense. Not that I think either of those companies are in any way trustworthy, but let's not compound the dangers to the public with CCP interference.
  - rchaud 3y ago
    > If there's a real national security risk it would make sense. Precisely. But as it stands, they even haven't made a case against Tiktok, let alone private investments by Chinese companies. There's nothing stopping the DOJ from laying charges against Tiktok US (the corporation) if there's evidence of contravening US law. But there is plenty of political hay to be made by suspecting that there might be. What laws, you ask? That too hasn't been clear, which helps explain why these bills fail again and again.

Are national security arguments not legal? My understanding was that Chinese Tech companies are required by law to serve as (willing or unwilling) arms of the domestic spy agency in China.

johngalt_ 3y ago

Same as in the US.

bogwog 3y ago

If the data collected on TikTok is a national security issue, that would be a good admission since it would mean we'd have to pass some actual privacy laws in this country. Facebook/Google/Microsoft/etc collect the same kind of data, and their revenues are not as important to protect as our national security (I assume).

Gormo 3y ago

> Are national security arguments not legal? Arguments aren't a source of law, and what's permissible in legislation is defined by the constitution.

throwawaymaths 3y ago
> what's permissible in legislation is defined by the constitution. Oh, sweet, summer child.
falcolas 3y ago
The constitution and the dozens of dozens of interpretations of the constitution by way of case law rendered by the supreme court. Reading the full text of the constitution won't do much but put you a toe past the starting line in understanding what is and is not "constitutional" in the US.

marcosdumay 3y ago

If there are no clear rules, no, it's not legal (by definition, "law" is a set of clear rules). If you decide that "no Chinese social network is allowed", you can create a law for that. But the TikTok ban is not like this.

stale2002 3y ago
If you care, you can find the clear rules here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RESTRICT_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RESTRICT_Act Impact to the country's critical infrastructure and digital economy, "Sabotage or subversion" of ICTS in the United States Interference and manipulation of federal elections Undermining the democratic process to "steer policy and regulatory decisions in favor of the strategic objectives of a foreign adversary to the detriment of the national security of the United States".

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

rchaud 3y ago

National security arguments can only go so far without falling afoul of Constitutional principles. Earlier versions of this bill failed because their breadth made it clear it could be used in situations not involving China or other 'bad' tech actors. A blanket ban on "Chinese tech" is immeasurably broad, and would harm legitimate business interests. Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle stop doing business in the country if they're selling products and services to Chinese tech firms? Correspondingly, Tencent has holdings in many American companies, Reddit and Twitter being two. Should Reddit be forced to buy out their holdings?

digging 3y ago
> Correspondingly, Tencent has holdings in many American companies, Reddit and Twitter being two. Should Reddit be forced to buy out their holdings? I mean, yeah maybe. If there's a real national security risk it would make sense. Not that I think either of those companies are in any way trustworthy, but let's not compound the dangers to the public with CCP interference.
- rchaud 3y ago
  > If there's a real national security risk it would make sense. Precisely. But as it stands, they even haven't made a case against Tiktok, let alone private investments by Chinese companies. There's nothing stopping the DOJ from laying charges against Tiktok US (the corporation) if there's evidence of contravening US law. But there is plenty of political hay to be made by suspecting that there might be. What laws, you ask? That too hasn't been clear, which helps explain why these bills fail again and again.