Update: The TikTok Clusterfuck: Trump To Order A Block, Microsoft Wants To Buy, And Competition Is Still There
from the say-what-now dept
Update: Sooo... we already have a bunch of updates on this story. Trump has said he's banning TikTok entirely and is "against" allowing a US company to buy TikTok. Below is the original post, with only a slight clarification regarding Ben Thompson's thoughts on TikTok, which I didn't present very clearly in the original. Then, beneath the post I'll have more thoughts on Trump's comments.
There's been a panic over the last few weeks about TikTok, the rapidly growing social network that is owned by the Chinese internet giant ByteDance (by way of history: ByteDance purchased a startup called Musical.ly in 2017, and rebranded it TikTok in 2018, and then it started growing like crazy). A few weeks ago, the Trump administration started suggesting it would ban TikTok, and a story was built up around the idea that TikTok was some sort of national security threat, despite very little evidence to support this. A separate narrative was simply that Trump was annoyed that TikTok kids made Trump look bad in Tulsa by reserving a bunch of tickets to his rally that they never intended to use.
Either way, it was announced today that the Trump administration was likely to order ByteDance to shed TikTok and immediately with that was the news that Microsoft was a likely buyer.
The whole thing is kind of silly. The most compelling argument I've seen for why the US should ban TikTok came from Ben Thompson at Stratechery, who more or less says (this is a very simplified version of his argument, so read the whole thing) that since China is engaged in a war to impose its ideology on the world, and that it will make use of TikTok and other services to effectively attack Western liberalism, it is effectively dangerous to allow it to operate in the west under Chinese ownership. He supports selling TikTok off to a American company, or barring that, banning the app in the West. I tend to lean the other way: to me, banning TikTok strikes me as effectively proving China's views on liberalism, and allowing them to claim hypocrisy on the west, and use these actions to justify its own actions.
On top of that, if the concern is about China, then the fact that most of our network and computer equipment is built in China would seem like maybe a larger concern? But beyond a weird, similar freakout about Huawei, no one seems to be taking any serious interest in that. And that doesn't get into the fact that US intelligence has leaned heavily on US internet companies to try to get access to global data -- meaning that there does seem to be a bit of US exceptionalism built into all of this: it's okay when we do it, but an affront if any other government might do the same thing...
Separately, this whole situation with TikTok and Microsoft demonstrates the pure silliness of the antitrust hearing in the House earlier this week. Note that there were claims that the four companies there represented "monopoly power." And yet, just days later, we're talking about how a recent entrant in the market, which has grown up quickly, and which Facebook certainly sees as a threat, is so powerful on the internet that it needs to be sold from its Chinese owners -- and the leading candidate to purchase it, Microsoft, is not even one of the "too powerful" companies who were on the panel.
If a new entrant can rise up so quickly to be a "threat" and then needs to be purchased by another giant... it certainly suggests that the internet market still remains pretty vibrant, and not at all locked down by a few monopolies.
Updated thoughts: So that's the original above. Now that Trump is saying he really is going to ban TikTok and is against its sale, there are multiple issues raised. Trump seems to think he can do this under his emergency economic powers (effectively declaring TikTok to be a national security issue -- the same "tool" he used to impose tariffs on China without Congressional approval). If he goes that route, there will be lawsuits -- and there will be significant Constitutional issues raised. The Supreme Court has in the past declared software speech, in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (the case about whether or not the government could regulate video games and require age warnings). And, in the 2nd Circuit, a somewhat frustrating decision regarding the publishing of some code that would break DRM, Universal v. Corley, it is at least notable that the Court made a clear statement that software is protected under the 1st Amendment:
Communication does not lose constitutional protection as "speech" simply because it is expressed in the language of computer code. Mathematical formulae and musical scores are written in "code," i.e., symbolic notations not comprehensible to the uninitiated, and yet both are covered by the First Amendment. If someone [*446] chose to write a novel entirely in computer object code by using strings of 1's and 0's for each letter of each word, the resulting work would be no different for constitutional purposes than if it had been written in English. The "object code" version would be incomprehensible to readers outside the programming community (and tedious to read even for most within the community), but it would be no more incomprehensible than a work written in Sanskrit for those unversed in that language. The undisputed evidence reveals that even pure object code can be, and often is, read and understood by experienced programmers. And source code (in any of its various levels of complexity) can be read by many more. Ultimately, however, the ease with which a work is comprehended is irrelevant to the constitutional inquiry. If computer code is distinguishable from conventional speech for First Amendment purposes, it is not because it is written in an obscure language.
And, later:
Computer programs are not exempted from the category of First Amendment speech simply because their instructions require use of a computer. A recipe is no less "speech" because it calls for the use of an oven, and a musical score is no less "speech" because it specifies performance on an electric guitar. Arguably distinguishing computer programs from conventional language instructions is the fact that programs are executable on a computer. But the fact that a program has the capacity to direct the functioning of a computer does not mean that it lacks the additional capacity to convey information, and it is the conveying of information that renders instructions "speech" for purposes of the First Amendment.
There were other issues with that case, but it remains law in the 2nd Circuit. TikTok suing over being banned would present an interesting 1st Amendment issue at the very least.
As to whether or not Trump could block the sale to a US company -- ordinarily the answer to that should also be no, with a few caveats. However, as was recently revealed in Congress, the Bill Barr-lead DOJ appears to have no problem at all weaponizing its powers against companies the President is annoyed with -- meaning that the DOJ could trump up some ridiculous excuse for why TikTok cannot be sold to an American company, and it's possible a court would buy it.
On a related noted, it's also entirely possible that the President would try to lean on both Apple and Google to remove TikTok from their app stores. And while I'd like to believe both companies would push back -- the fact that there are realistically just those two bottlenecks to blocking TikTok entirely from the country, it could also get... interesting.
I get the feeling we'll be writing about all of this for quite some time.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: china, competition, donald trump, internet, ownership, trade war
Companies: microsoft, tiktok
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Forcing the sale of TikTok
Exactly how does Trump have the authority to tell a Chinese firm to sell one of its assets???
[ link to this | view in thread ]
His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
Is Trump driving the delusion that he can order a company to be sold or is it the delusion that is driving Trump? Either way, just where does the government, including Trump, think they get the authority to order a company to be sold?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Forcing the sale of TikTok
He doesn't, but like most of his presidency it won't stop him from trying
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What better way?
What better way to destroy TikTok than by selling it to Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Because Microsoft would never misuse a monopoly power, right?
Broader context: this is a standard MBA-training technique: strike scintillating sparks of genius off your solid-granite cranium, then watch as your shocked-and-awed minions scurry about to immanentize your "vision". Take credit if it doesn't fail too blatantly; assess blame to minions if it doesn't succeed beyond your wildest dreams of avarice. Take time off to dream wilder dreams.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
'Nice company you got there...'
Because apparently they were stupid enough to have US offices, which I imagine is being used as the justification as to why Trump's latest temper-tantrum is acceptable and legal.
From the Bloomberg article:
TikTok, which has offices in Los Angeles, has been looking for ways to distance itself from its Chinese ownership, seeking to reassure the public that no data is stored on servers in China and that the app operates independently. Bytedance even appointed a CEO formerly of Walt Disney Co, Kevin Mayer, to run its operations in America and the rest of the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
I don't see how the United States could order Google or Apple to remove the app from their respective app stores. Trump can shriek as loud as he wants, but just don't see the legal means by which he could make this happen. Any theories?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
'Sic the DOJ on them for 'security investigations', tying them up in court and discovery, bleeding them of as much money as possible' is the first that comes to mind, but given how petulant and petty Trump is I wouldn't put anything past him at this point.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yeah, this has racist 'look, a distraction/scapegoat!' and petulant 'how dare they allow people to make me look bad?!' written all over it, because if it really was a about security then as the article notes, there are much more important things to focus on.f
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 'Nice company you got there...'
Having US offices doesn't change the fact that Trump has no power to force anyone to sell anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
The Orange One seriously thinks he has ultimate power to do whatever he wants. Give him another term and he just might find a way to make that happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
Vote him out, and he will try to remain on power, claiming postal ballots were fraudulent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
This is a good question to ponder with a terrible answer....which is a Great Firewall of America....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fooka u meesta tlump !
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The nsa is getting tons of data from isps and telecom company's. And alot of network equipment
is made in China. Tik toks problem is its a massive success especially with young people so some politicians don't like the idea that's its owned by a Chinese company.
It s the biggest app since Instagram and YouTube.
China has stakes in gaming company's like epic
that have millions of American users.
There seems to.be.a cold war going on between USA and China.
Following China in banning apps is just going down
to their level
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: 'Nice company you got there...'
Maybe not legally, but when has he ever paid attention to that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What better way?
Faster way to kill it is to sell it to Google and put it beta...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Has donald bought Iceland yet?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Microsoft needs a popular social media app, they spent millions on mixer, which was a flop.
If they buy it there.ll be an Xbox console tik Tok app.
I hope they don, t mess it up like they did with Skype.
Which is now to hard to use with a strange Uí layout.
I wonder would Google or amazon be allowed to buy it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What better way?
Naw, that will drag on for eh verrrr.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Which company buys TikTok wouldn’t matter if that buyer can’t keep the userbase from jumping ship.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What better way?
Let's not forget yahoo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What better way?
Pfft, just see what would happen if AT&T bought the company.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, which granted such authority to the President upon review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. It's been used previously: Bush Sr. ordering CATIC to sell Mamco, by Bush Jr ordering Smartmatic to sell Sequoia Voting Systems, by Obama to force Ralls to sell several wind farms, and by Trump last year to force Beijing Kunlun Tech Co to sell Grindr.
It's more commonly used to prohibit acquisitions, or attach additional requirements to acquisitions (eg NTT's aquisition of Verio).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 'Nice company you got there...'
Speaking as an American, it seems that it would make far more sense for TikTok to divest itself of it's American operations than to sell.
Unless of course they can sucker Microsoft into drastically over-paying. MS will of course not get TikTok and will screw it up horribly (see Skype), so at some level this is a chance to pocket a pile of American dollars and then start working on TikTok's replacement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
"upon review" being the part Trump will sidestep. He's already defied Congessional requirements without penalty, why would he stop now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What better way?
You need money to buy it first, and you can't put TikTok in a Morris trust to securitize debt notes like AT&T normally does in an acquisition. Somebody would have to write a check, and that won't happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Musk, China on line 1
What will Trump do when Xi tells Elon he has to sell Tesla to SAIC Motor?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
ByteDance has been under review by the CFIUS since November 2019.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
UPDATE: Trump says he will ban TikTok from operating in the United States.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
Couldn't they use economic sanctions? Some companies won't export free software to Iran, for example. If TikTok couldn't export software from its US offices to its Chinese offices, or couldn't use the American banking system (e.g. to accept advertising money from American companies), they'd have some trouble.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Update
I've added a big update based on Trump's statements this evening... (and also clarifying Ben Thompson's position, which I did not articulate well at all).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Update
I'm guessing you meant "companies" here, but it sounds very cyberpunk to call Google and Apple countries...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trump is just furious over being humiliated by a bunch of kids punking him with the Tulsa rally.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
Look at what is happening to Huawei.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Tulsa corona swap-meet you mean?
As pranks go that one was glorious.
Before the rally be was bragging about how the event was so sold out the seats were going to be packed and it was going to be such a huge corona sharing event that people would be waiting outside for a second rally speech and then the event rolls around and... huge, blatantly obvious sections of empty seats, so large that they would have been impossible to miss any time he looked out.
For a childish narcissist like him who uses political rallies to cheer himself up that must have been really galling, so it makes sense that he would lash out against the platform that people used to accomplish it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
Gotta vote ya up for the attempt to make people more knowledgeable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
Interesting for sure, does this allow donny to force the Iceland purchase?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh, he absolutely hated that the expectations were so high and the turnout was so low. If you want proof, look at the photo of Trump after returning to the White House following the Tulsa rally. I’ve never seen him look that defeated before.
Once word got out about how TikTok fucked him over, anyone with any sense knew he would eventually retaliate against TikTok. His narcissism drives his vengeance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Give them time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why hasn't Trump tried to ban VK? 🤔
Other than popularity, I don't know what sort of relevant distinctions can be made between VK and TikTok. I'm assuming VK engages in the same sort of data harvesting as everyone else, just like TikTok. And I'm sure VK's apps have had security vulnerabilities in the past, just like TikTok (and every other piece of software ever made). And if we're gonna go the CHINA BAD route, then, well, I'd say Russia is arguably worse given their meddling in USA elections.
Anyone more familiar with VK who might have some better insight as to why it has managed to fly under the radar?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It was a fantastic punking, but it cannot be all accounted to TikTok users. People were just not showing up anyway, and this should not be forgotten.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Why hasn't Trump tried to ban VK? 🤔
It just isn't anywhere as near as popular here and never was.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Why hasn't Trump tried to ban VK? 🤔
A ban on vk could be circumvented with a VPN
Same with tiktok
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I still really want to know how "banning it" is going to work. I can't wait to see.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh, people not showing up had nothing to do with TikTok. (Blame that on COVID.) Generating hype for more people showing up than actually showed up — and thus making Trump and his team look like chumps when they went through all the work of building that outdoor stage — was what TikTok did. I hope Trump stayed up all that night angry about it, too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Why hasn't Trump tried to ban VK? 🤔
There weren't a bunch of headlines about VK users meddling with a Trump rally leading to his public humiliation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: 'Nice company you got there...'
"Having US offices doesn't change the fact that Trump has no power to force anyone to sell anything."
Neither does the mob when Vinnie the Knife strolls into your store and tells you you can either sell it to his boss at half of what it cost you and get out of dodge or you can spend the rest of the year having a gang of thugs running your customers off and beating up your employees.
Trump doesn't have the power to legally shut anyone down. But he doesn't need to. All he needs to do is whisper "Will no one rid me of these troublesome people?" for his cadre of sycophants to arrange matters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: His power isn't absolute, but he thinks it is
"...does this allow donny to force the Iceland purchase?"
Not, it won't let him force the Greenland purchase.
Iceland is a sovereign nation, Greenland is - on paper at least - part of the danish commonwealth. One which in times of global warming has acquired some fairly brand new strategic worth.
The reason Trump is really after greenland is, of course, because greenland's ice cap melting off this fast not only opens a potential new sea route off their coast but also exposes about half a continent's worth of pristine resources to tap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
No, because the island he wants to buy is Greenland. Reason being that global warming is currently pulling the ice cap back from about half a continent's worth of untapped resources.
Denmark, to whom Greenland belongs, isn't amused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Why hasn't Trump tried to ban VK? 🤔
"Anyone more familiar with VK who might have some better insight as to why it has managed to fly under the radar?"
People didn't punk Trump on VK, hence not a single shit is given about it. It's that simple.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wait a sec ... is tic toc a person, like corporations are people my friend? Then isnt donny violating the first amendment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The US just wants to retain total control over the memes of production.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
More seriously, this is deeply bullshit and worrying on all sorts of levels. That kind of attack and discrimination driven by anger in the executive branch, and the fact that there seems little to check it in the immediate sense (since the only remedy is likely extended and costly litigation which might only be resolved well after the damage is done) is the kind of unchecked power that encourages censorship of these platforms, and heavy self censorship by companies and executives.
This is the case for both US and foreign companies. While TikTok being a foreign company makes it a much easier target the administration has shown little compunction against moving against US companies on the behest of Trump. It's a further example of the breakdown of a rules based system in the US and further reinforcement that there is very little immediate recourse against the executive branch running amok.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What if ByteDance refuses? How could USA block TikTok?
Well legally it's a mess, but technically it can be done easily. Just revoke the app's signature. That will take care of most devices. The only exceptions being jailbroken iDevices and Android devices that allow side-loading or that have unlocked bootloaders.
As for legal theories, they could just claim National Security the entire way as per the article. They could also revoke ByteDance's corporate charter and seize their assets, forcing the app into abandonment. Or The Orange One could just send in his thugs to arrest ByteDance's employees and anyone else who dare help them. (They already do it in Portland and get away with it.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]