Tag Archives: Legislative Branch

House passes bill that could ban TikTok

Posted on by

A bill that could force a sale or outright ban on TikTok passed the House just days after it was first introduced. The House of Representatives approved the measure Wednesday, in a vote of 352 - 65, in a rare showing of bipartisan support. It now goes to the Senate.

If passed into law, the legislation would give parent company ByteDance a six-month window to sell TikTok or face a ban from US app stores and web hosting services. While the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” is far from the first effort to force a ban or sale of TikTok, it’s been able to draw more support far more quickly than previous bills.

The measure cleared its first procedural vote in the House last week, just two days after it was introduced. The bill will now move onto the Senate, where its future is less certain. Senator Rand Paul has said he would block the bill, while other lawmakers have also been hesitant to publicly back the bill.

TikTok has called the bill unconstitutional and said it would hurt creators and businesses that rely on the service. "This process was secret and the bill was jammed through for one reason: it's a ban," a TikTok spokesperson said in a statement following the House vote. "We are hopeful that the Senate will consider the facts, listen to their constituents, and realize the impact on the economy, 7 million small businesses, and the 170 million Americans who use our service."

Last week, the company sent a wave of push notifications to users, urging them to ask their representatives to oppose the bill. Congressional staffers reported that offices were overwhelmed with calls, many of which came from confused teenagers. Lawmakers later accused the company of trying to “interfere” with the legislative process.

Free speech and digital rights groups also oppose the bill, with many noting that comprehensive privacy laws would be more effective at protecting Americans’ user data rather than a measure that primarily targets one app. Former President Donald Trump, who once also tried to force ByteDance to sell TikTok, has also said he is against the bill, claiming it would strengthen Meta.

In a letter to lawmakers, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Fight for the Future and the Center for Democracy and Technology argued that the bill would “set an alarming global precedent for excessive government control over social media platforms” and would likely “invite copycat measures by other countries … with significant consequences for free expression globally.”

If the bill were to muster enough votes to pass the Senate, President Joe Biden says he would sign the bill into law. His administration has previously pressured ByteDance to sell TikTok. Officials maintain the app poses a national security risk due to its ties to ByteDance, a Chinese company. TikTok has repeatedly refuted these claims.

If the law was passed, the company would likely mount a legal challenge like it did in Montana, which passed a statewide ban last year. A federal judge temporarily blocked the ban in November before it could go into effect.

Update March 13, 2024, 12:32PM ET: This story has been updated to add a statement from a TikTok spokesperson.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/house-passes-bill-that-could-ban-tiktok-144805114.html?src=rss

TikTok is encouraging its users to call their representatives about attempts to ban the app

Posted on by

TikTok is stepping up its efforts to fight a new bill that could force a ban of the app in the United States. The app has been alerting its millions of US users about the measure, which would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in US app stores.

“TikTok is at risk of being shut down in the US,” the push notification says. “Call your representative now.” An in-app message then instructs users to “speak up now — before your government strips 170 million Americans of their Constitutional right to free expression.” It also provides users a shortcut to dial their representative’s office if they enter their zip code.

The push alerts are reportedly already having a dramatic effect. Politico reporter Olivia Beavers said that House staffers report their offices are being inundated with calls. One staffer said on X that “we're getting a lot of calls from high schoolers asking what a Congressman is.”

Unfortunately for TikTok, their plan to stir up resistance to the bill may not be having the intended effect. The flood of calls may in fact be “backfiring,” according to Beavers, who says the response may be increasing support for the bill among members of Congress. In a post on X, Representative Mike Gallagher, who chairs the select committee that introduced the bill, said the push notifications were “interfering with the legislative process.” 

The alerts come amid growing support for the measure, which was introduced earlier this week by members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. On Thursday, the bill cleared its first legislative hurdle with a unanimous vote, 50 - 0, by members of the Energy and Commerce Committee to advance the measure. President Joe Biden, whose administration has also sought to force a divestiture of TikTok, is reportedly supportive of the bill. As Punchbowl News notes, previous bills to ban TikTok have not had the backing of the White House.

If passed, the bill would give TikTok about six months to separate itself from ByteDance or else an app store ban would take effect. "This legislation has a predetermined outcome: a total ban of TikTok in the United States," TikTok said in a statement published after the vote in the House. "The government is attempting to strip 170 million Americans of their Constitutional right to free expression. This will damage millions of businesses, deny artists an audience, and destroy the livelihoods of countless creators across the country.”

Digital rights groups also oppose the measure. The ACLU has called it “unconstitutional,” while other groups say that comprehensive privacy legislation would be a more effective way to protect Americans’ data.

Update March 7, 2024, 3:52PM ET: This story has been updated to reflect the results of a vote by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a statement from TikTok.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/tiktok-is-encouraging-its-users-to-call-their-representatives-about-attempts-to-ban-the-app-202056111.html?src=rss

TikTok is encouraging its users to call their representatives about attempts to ban the app

Posted on by

TikTok is stepping up its efforts to fight a new bill that could force a ban of the app in the United States. The app has been alerting its millions of US users about the measure, which would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in US app stores.

“TikTok is at risk of being shut down in the US,” the push notification says. “Call your representative now.” An in-app message then instructs users to “speak up now — before your government strips 170 million Americans of their Constitutional right to free expression.” It also provides users a shortcut to dial their representative’s office if they enter their zip code.

The push alerts are reportedly already having a dramatic effect. Politico reporter Olivia Beavers said that House staffers report their offices are being inundated with calls. One staffer said on X that “we're getting a lot of calls from high schoolers asking what a Congressman is.”

Unfortunately for TikTok, their plan to stir up resistance to the bill may not be having the intended effect. The flood of calls may in fact be “backfiring,” according to Beavers, who says the response may be increasing support for the bill among members of Congress. In a post on X, Representative Mike Gallagher, who chairs the select committee that introduced the bill, said the push notifications were “interfering with the legislative process.” 

The alerts come amid growing support for the measure, which was introduced earlier this week by members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. On Thursday, the bill cleared its first legislative hurdle with a unanimous vote, 50 - 0, by members of the Energy and Commerce Committee to advance the measure. President Joe Biden, whose administration has also sought to force a divestiture of TikTok, is reportedly supportive of the bill. As Punchbowl News notes, previous bills to ban TikTok have not had the backing of the White House.

If passed, the bill would give TikTok about six months to separate itself from ByteDance or else an app store ban would take effect. "This legislation has a predetermined outcome: a total ban of TikTok in the United States," TikTok said in a statement published after the vote in the House. "The government is attempting to strip 170 million Americans of their Constitutional right to free expression. This will damage millions of businesses, deny artists an audience, and destroy the livelihoods of countless creators across the country.”

Digital rights groups also oppose the measure. The ACLU has called it “unconstitutional,” while other groups say that comprehensive privacy legislation would be a more effective way to protect Americans’ data.

Update March 7, 2024, 3:52PM ET: This story has been updated to reflect the results of a vote by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a statement from TikTok.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/tiktok-is-encouraging-its-users-to-call-their-representatives-about-attempts-to-ban-the-app-202056111.html?src=rss

Lawmakers have a new plan to force ByteDance to sell TikTok

Posted on by

A group of lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in the United States. The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” would prohibit US app stores and web hosting services from distributing TikTok unless it divested from parent company ByteDance.

The bill is the latest in a long line of attempts by lawmakers and other officials to ban or force a sale of the app. Former President Donald Trump attempted to force a sale of TikTok in 2020, but was ultimately unsuccessful. The Biden Administration has also pressured the company to divest. And a US District Court Judge recently blocked an attempt to ban the app in Montana.

The new bill, which comes from a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House, takes a different approach. It would give ByteDance a six-month window to sell TikTok before app store-level bans would come into effect. It would also require TikTok and other apps to “provide users with a copy of their data in a format that can be imported” into competing apps. And though TikTok is referenced several times in the text of the bill, the legislation would open the door for bans on other “foreign adversary-controlled” apps if the president deemed them to be a national security threat.

“This bill is an outright ban of TikTok, no matter how much the authors try to disguise it,” TikTok said in a statement. “This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs.”

TikTok CEO Shou Chew has maintained that a divestment would not fully address officials’ concerns about US user data. The company has spent years trying to address national security concerns about its service with an initiative called Project Texas. Under the plan, created as a result of years of negotiations with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), US users’ data would be separated into US-based servers and government officials would be able to oversee audits of TikTok’s source code and other aspects of its operations.

The Washington Post reported last year that TikTok’s negotiations with CFIUS had been recently “revived amid doubts the [Biden] administration has the authority to ban TikTok on its own.” If Congress was able to pass the new bill, it would clear up such questions and create a new process for forcing ByteDance's hand. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other digital rights groups have criticized the government's efforts to ban TikTok. In a statement on the latest bill, the ACLU said the proposed measure was "unconstitutional" and would hurt free speech. "Just because the bill sponsors claim that banning TikTok isn’t about suppressing speech, there’s no denying that it would do just that," senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said. 

Columbia University's nonprofit Knight First Amendment Institute raised similar concerns. "Congress can protect data privacy and security without banning Americans from accessing one of the world’s most popular communications platforms," the organization's executive director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement. "It should start by passing a comprehensive privacy law restricting the kinds of information that TikTok and other platforms can collect." 

Update March 5, 2024 6:50 PM ET: This story has been updated to add comments from the ACLU and Knight First Amendment Institute. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/lawmakers-have-a-new-plan-to-force-bytedance-to-sell-tiktok-220408004.html?src=rss

Lawmakers have a new plan to force ByteDance to sell TikTok

Posted on by

A group of lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in the United States. The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” would prohibit US app stores and web hosting services from distributing TikTok unless it divested from parent company ByteDance.

The bill is the latest in a long line of attempts by lawmakers and other officials to ban or force a sale of the app. Former President Donald Trump attempted to force a sale of TikTok in 2020, but was ultimately unsuccessful. The Biden Administration has also pressured the company to divest. And a US District Court Judge recently blocked an attempt to ban the app in Montana.

The new bill, which comes from a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House, takes a different approach. It would give ByteDance a six-month window to sell TikTok before app store-level bans would come into effect. It would also require TikTok and other apps to “provide users with a copy of their data in a format that can be imported” into competing apps. And though TikTok is referenced several times in the text of the bill, the legislation would open the door for bans on other “foreign adversary-controlled” apps if the president deemed them to be a national security threat.

“This bill is an outright ban of TikTok, no matter how much the authors try to disguise it,” TikTok said in a statement. “This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs.”

TikTok CEO Shou Chew has maintained that a divestment would not fully address officials’ concerns about US user data. The company has spent years trying to address national security concerns about its service with an initiative called Project Texas. Under the plan, created as a result of years of negotiations with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), US users’ data would be separated into US-based servers and government officials would be able to oversee audits of TikTok’s source code and other aspects of its operations.

The Washington Post reported last year that TikTok’s negotiations with CFIUS had been recently “revived amid doubts the [Biden] administration has the authority to ban TikTok on its own.” If Congress was able to pass the new bill, it would clear up such questions and create a new process for forcing ByteDance's hand. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other digital rights groups have criticized the government's efforts to ban TikTok. In a statement on the latest bill, the ACLU said the proposed measure was "unconstitutional" and would hurt free speech. "Just because the bill sponsors claim that banning TikTok isn’t about suppressing speech, there’s no denying that it would do just that," senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said. 

Columbia University's nonprofit Knight First Amendment Institute raised similar concerns. "Congress can protect data privacy and security without banning Americans from accessing one of the world’s most popular communications platforms," the organization's executive director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement. "It should start by passing a comprehensive privacy law restricting the kinds of information that TikTok and other platforms can collect." 

Update March 5, 2024 6:50 PM ET: This story has been updated to add comments from the ACLU and Knight First Amendment Institute. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/lawmakers-have-a-new-plan-to-force-bytedance-to-sell-tiktok-220408004.html?src=rss

Oregon’s new Right to Repair bill targets anti-repair practices

Posted on by

Oregon is set to become the latest state to pass a Right to Repair law. The Oregon House of Representatives passed the Right to Repair Act (SB 1596) on March 4, two weeks after it advanced from the Senate. It now heads to Governor Tina Kotek's desk, who has five days to sign it.

California, Minnesota and New York have similar legislation, but Nathan Proctor, the Public Interest Research Group's Right to Repair Campaign senior director, calls Oregon's legislation "the best bill yet." (It's worth noting that Colorado also has its own Right to Repair legislation that has a different remit around agricultural equipment rather than around consumer electronics.)

If made into law, Oregon's Right To Repair Act would be the first to ban "parts pairing," a practice that prevents individuals from swapping out a piece for another, theoretically equivalent one. For example, a person might replace their iPhone battery with an identical one from the same model, but they'll likely receive an error message that it either can't be verified or used. The system forces people to buy the part directly from the manufacturer and can only activate it with their consent — otherwise users will have to buy an entirely new device altogether. Instead, under the new bill, manufacturers would be required to:

  • Prevent or inhibit an independent repair provider or an owner from installing or enabling the function of an otherwise functional replacement part or a component of consumer electronic equipment, including a replacement part or a component that the original equipment manufacturer has not approved.

  • Reduce the functionality or performance of consumer electronic equipment.

  • Cause consumer electronic equipment to display misleading alerts or warnings, which the owner cannot immediately dismiss, about unidentified parts.

Along with restricting parts pairing, the act dictates that manufacturers must make compatible parts available to device owners through the company or an authorized service provider for the most favorable price and without any "substantial" conditions.

The parts pairing ban applies to any devices first built or sold in Oregon starting in 2025. However, the law backdates general coverage of electronics to 2015, except for cell phones. Oregon's mobile devices purchased starting July 2021 count — a stipulation in line with California's and Minnesota's Right to Repair bills.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/oregons-new-right-to-repair-bill-targets-anti-repair-practices-143001457.html?src=rss

Oregon’s new Right to Repair bill targets anti-repair practices

Posted on by

Oregon is set to become the latest state to pass a Right to Repair law. The Oregon House of Representatives passed the Right to Repair Act (SB 1596) on March 4, two weeks after it advanced from the Senate. It now heads to Governor Tina Kotek's desk, who has five days to sign it.

California, Minnesota and New York have similar legislation, but Nathan Proctor, the Public Interest Research Group's Right to Repair Campaign senior director, calls Oregon's legislation "the best bill yet." (It's worth noting that Colorado also has its own Right to Repair legislation that has a different remit around agricultural equipment rather than around consumer electronics.)

If made into law, Oregon's Right To Repair Act would be the first to ban "parts pairing," a practice that prevents individuals from swapping out a piece for another, theoretically equivalent one. For example, a person might replace their iPhone battery with an identical one from the same model, but they'll likely receive an error message that it either can't be verified or used. The system forces people to buy the part directly from the manufacturer and can only activate it with their consent — otherwise users will have to buy an entirely new device altogether. Instead, under the new bill, manufacturers would be required to:

  • Prevent or inhibit an independent repair provider or an owner from installing or enabling the function of an otherwise functional replacement part or a component of consumer electronic equipment, including a replacement part or a component that the original equipment manufacturer has not approved.

  • Reduce the functionality or performance of consumer electronic equipment.

  • Cause consumer electronic equipment to display misleading alerts or warnings, which the owner cannot immediately dismiss, about unidentified parts.

Along with restricting parts pairing, the act dictates that manufacturers must make compatible parts available to device owners through the company or an authorized service provider for the most favorable price and without any "substantial" conditions.

The parts pairing ban applies to any devices first built or sold in Oregon starting in 2025. However, the law backdates general coverage of electronics to 2015, except for cell phones. Oregon's mobile devices purchased starting July 2021 count — a stipulation in line with California's and Minnesota's Right to Repair bills.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/oregons-new-right-to-repair-bill-targets-anti-repair-practices-143001457.html?src=rss

Senate tells social media CEOs they have ‘blood on their hands’ for failing to protect children

Posted on by

The CEOs of Meta, Snap, Discord, X and TikTok testified at a high-stakes Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on child exploitation online. During the hearing, Mark Zuckerberg, Evan Spiegel, Jason Citron, Linda Yaccarino and Shou Chew spent nearly four hours being grilled by lawmakers about their records on child safety. 

The hearing was the first time Spiegel, Citron and Yaccarino testified to Congress. Notably, all three were subpoenaed by the committee after refusing to appear voluntarily, according to lawmakers. Judiciary Committee Chair Senator Dick Durbin noted that Citron “only accepted services of his subpoena after US Marshals were sent to Discord’s headquarters at taxpayers’ expense.”

The hearing room was filled with parents of children who had been victims of online exploitation on social media. Many members of the audience silently held up photos of their children as the CEOs entered the room, and Durbin kicked off the hearing with a somber video featuring victims of child exploitation and their parents.

“Discord has been used to groom, abduct and abuse children,” Durbin said. “Meta’s Instagram helped connect and promote a network of pedophiles. Snapchat’s disappearing messages have been co-opted by criminals who financially extort young victims. TikTok has become a quote platform of choice for predators to access, engage and groom children for abuse. And the prevalence of CSAM on X has grown as the company has gutted its trust and safety workforce.”

During the hearing, many of the senators shared personal stories of parents whose children had died by suicide after being exploited online. "Mr. Zuckerberg, you and the companies before us — I know you don't mean it to be so — but you have blood on your hands," Senator Lindsey Graham said in his opening remarks. The audience applauded. 

While years of similar hearings have so far failed to produce any new laws, there is growing bipartisan support in Congress for new safety regulations. As Tech Policy Press points out, there are currently more than half a dozen bills dealing with children's online safety that have been proposed by senators. These include the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which would require platforms to create more parental control and safety features and submit to independent audits, and COPPA 2.0, a revised version of the 1998 Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act, which would bar companies from collecting or monetizing children’s data without consent.

Senators have also proposed a number of bills to address child exploitation, including the EARN IT Act, currently in its third iteration since 2020, and the STOP CSAM Act. None of these have advanced to the Senate floor for a vote. Many of these bills have faced intense lobbying from the tech industry, though some companies in attendance said they were open to some bills and some aspects of the legislation.

Spiegel said that Snap supports KOSA. Yaccarino said X supports the STOP CSAM Act. Shou and Citron both declined to specifically endorse the bills they were asked about, but said they were open to more discussions.

Zuckerberg suggested a different approach, saying he supported age verification and parental control requirements at the app store level, which would effectively shift the burden to Apple and Google. "Apple already requires parental consent when a child does a payment with an app, so it should be pretty trivial to pass a law that requires them to make it so parents have control anytime a child downloads an app,” Zuckerberg said.

Meta has come increased pressure in recent months following a lawsuit from 41 states for harming teens’ mental health. Court documents from the suit allege that Meta turned a blind eye to children under 13 using its service, did little to stop adults from sexually harassing teens on Facebook and that Zuckerberg personally intervened to stop an effort to ban plastic surgery filters on Instagram.

Unsurprisingly, Zuckerberg came under particular scrutiny during the hearing. In one awkward exchange, Senator Graham asked Zuckerberg if the parents of a child who died by suicide after falling victim to a sextortion scheme should be able to sue Meta. Zuckerberg, looking uncomfortable, paused and said “I think that they can sue us.”

Later, Senator Josh Hawley pressed the Meta founder on whether he would personally apologize to the parents in the hearing room. Zuckerberg stood up and faced the audience. "I’m sorry for everything you have all been through," he said. "No one should go through the things that your families have suffered and this is why we invest so much and we are going to continue doing industry-wide efforts to make sure no one has to go through the things your families have had to suffer."

Spiegel was also asked to directly address parents. “Mr. Spiegel, there are a number of parents who have children who have been able to access illegal drugs on your platform, what do you say to those parents,” Scenario Laphonza Butler asked the Snap founder. “I’m so sorry,” he said.

As with many past hearings featuring tech CEOs, some lawmakers strayed off topic. Multiple senators pressed Chew on TikTok’s relationship with China, as well as its handling of content moderation during the Israel-Hamas war. Senator Tom Cotton repeatedly asked TikTok's CEO about his citizenship (Chew is Singaporean). 

There were also some bizarre moments, like when Senator John Kennedy asked Spiegel if he knew the meaning of “yada yada yada” (Spiegel claimed he was “not familiar” with the phrase). “Can we agree … what you do is what you believe and everything else is just cottage cheese,” Kennedy asked.

During the hearing, many of the companies touted their existing safety features and parental controls (Meta launched several updates in the lead-up to the hearing). Yaccarino, who repeatedly claimed that X was a “brand new company” said X was considering adding parental controls. “Being a 14-month-old company we have reprioritized child protection and safety measures,” she said. “And we have just begun to talk about and discuss how we can enhance those with parental controls.”

In the US, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-8255 or you can simply dial 988. Crisis Text Line can be reached by texting HOME to 741741 (US), 686868 (Canada), or 85258 (UK). Wikipedia maintains a list of crisis lines for people outside of those countries.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/senate-tells-social-media-ceos-they-have-blood-on-their-hands-for-failing-to-protect-children-170411884.html?src=rss

Tech CEOs are set to testify in a Senate online child sexual exploitation hearing in December

Posted on by

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on online child sexual exploitation on December 6 and the CEOs of major tech companies are set to testify. The committee expects Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his counterpart at TikTok, Shou Zi Chew, to testify voluntarily. It also wants to hear from the CEOs of X (formerly Twitter), Discord and Snap, and it has issued subpoenas to them.

"Big Tech’s failure to police itself at the expense of our kids cannot go unanswered," committee chair Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and ranking member Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said in a joint statement, as Reuters reports. "I’m hauling in Big Tech CEOs before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify on their failure to protect kids online," Durbin wrote on X.

According to the committee, X and Discord refused to accept service of the subpoenas on their CEO's behalf, "requiring the committee to enlist the assistance of the US Marshals Service" to serve them personally. "We have been working in good faith to participate in the Judiciary committee’s hearing on child protection online as safety is our top priority at X," Wifredo Fernandez, head of US and Canada government affairs at X, told Engadget in a statement. "Today we are communicating our updated availability to participate in a hearing on this important issue." 

“Keeping our users safe, especially young people, is central to everything we do at Discord," a Discord spokesperson told Engadget. "We have been actively engaging with the Committee on how we can best contribute to this important industry discussion. We welcome the opportunity to work together as an industry and with the Committee."

The issue of tech platforms allegedly facilitating harms against kids has become an increasingly pressing issue. Earlier this month, former Meta executive Arturo Béjar testified that Zuckerberg failed to respond to his email detailing concerns about harms facing children on the company's platforms. Senators then demanded documents from the company's CEO "related to senior executives’ knowledge of the mental and physical health harms associated with its platforms, including Facebook and Instagram."

Update 11/20 3:40PM ET: Added Discord's statement. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/tech-ceos-are-set-to-testify-in-a-senate-online-child-sexual-exploitation-hearing-in-december-180206072.html?src=rss