Again, don’t ban TikTok

You cannot trust the banning entity with the powers you are about to give it:

The RESTRICT Act, a proposed piece of legislation which provides one way the government might ban TikTok, contains “insanely broad” language and could lead to other apps or communications services with connections to foreign countries being banned in the U.S., multiple digital rights experts told Motherboard.

The bill could have implications not just for social networks, but potentially security tools such as virtual private networks (VPNs) that consumers use to encrypt and route their traffic, one said. Although the intention of the bill is to target apps or services that pose a threat to national security, these critics worry it may have much wider implications for the First Amendment…

Under the RESTRICT Act, the Department of Commerce would identify information and communications technology products that a foreign adversary has any interest in, or poses an unacceptable risk to national security, the announcement reads. The bill only applies to technology linked to a “foreign adversary.” Those countries include China (as well as Hong Kong); Cuba; Iran; North Korea; Russia, and Venezuela.

The bill’s language includes vague terms such as “desktop applications,” “mobile applications,” “gaming applications,” “payment applications,” and “web-based applications.” It also targets applicable software that has more than 1 million users in the U.S.

Here is the full story.  Here is my previous post on banning TikTok, now that we see the actual proposed ban I consider my earlier arguments an understatement.  Should it really be possible that you could get 20 years in prison for using a VPN to bypass such a ban?  20 years behind bars is unlikely, but more broadly this is a sign that we are addressing the TikTok problems with very much the wrong policy instruments.

Comments

Comments for this post are closed