Why talk about the Tiktok Bill?

I really do not have the time to be doing this, but I thought it was important. A lot of information gets passed around on the internet from day-to-day. And plenty of those in the conservative and libertarian camp get squeamish when we talk about government restricting anything. I understand that. In fact, I’m not even sure I’ve come up with a complete opinion about this bill.

 

However, this bill has a lot about it that people are NOT talking about. Most of the talking points being bandied about include:

• “They’ll use it to shut down Rumble” or “X”.

• “President Trump doesn’t like it, so it must not be any good.”

• “Biden will use it to shut down MAGA supporters.”

• “It’s a slap in the face to libertarians.”

 

I get it. I’m not even saying you’re wrong. But let’s at least do a quick dive into the bill to see what it says, and what it does not say.

 

What is the TikTok bill?

H.R. 7521 functions as legislation to stop foreign adversaries from having financial (read directional/operational) authority over a VERY SELECT group of companies that operate in the US. Let’s look at the language real quick.

 

SEC. 2. Prohibition of foreign adversary controlled applications.

(a) In general.—

(1) PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS.—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:

(A) Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.

(B) Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.

(2) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall apply—

(A) in the case of an application that satisfies the definition of a foreign adversary controlled application pursuant to subsection (g)(3)(A), beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(B) in the case of an application that satisfies the definition of a foreign adversary controlled application pursuant to subsection (g)(3)(B), beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of the relevant determination of the President under such subsection.

 

Now, what does all that mean?

An application controlled by a foreign adversary cannot be offered/hosted by platforms here in the US. In other words, Tiktok (which gets named specifically) would not be allowed to be offered on Google’s Play store, Apple’s app store, or hosted on any American platform.

You may have a question: But what is a foreign adversary? And what do we mean by control?

 

What is a foreign adversary controlled application?

(3) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATION.—The term “foreign adversary controlled application” means a website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application that is operated, directly or indirectly (including through a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate), by—

(A) any of—

(i) ByteDance, Ltd.;

(ii) TikTok;

(iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that is controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(iv) an entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by an entity identified in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or

(B) a covered company that—

(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and

(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—

(I) a public notice proposing such determination; and

(II) a public report to Congress, submitted not less than 30 days before such determination, describing the specific national security concern involved and containing a classified annex and a description of what assets would need to be divested to execute a qualified divestiture.

(4) FOREIGN ADVERSARY COUNTRY.—The term “foreign adversary country” means a country specified in section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

 

So what does that mean?

1. Notice ByteDance and TikTok are named specifically. Then it goes on to describe companies flat out controlled by a foreign adversary, or a covered company (covered and controlled by a foreign adversary).

2. The president must determine there is a national security threat

3.It must be in a public report to Congress at least 30 days prior to the determination.

4. And this is the piece of the puzzle no one is paying attention to: what is a foreign adversary?

Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. That’s it. Those are legally defined foreign adversaries in section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

 

Put it all together

In order for a company to be in the cross-hairs of this legislation, they must:

1. Be an app/website that has more than 1,000,000 users, and offers those users ability to do their own independent content creation on the platform

2. The app/website must also be controlled/owned by a FOREIGN ADVERSARY as defined by US legal code

3. The president must determine it a national security threat. (I get it, we all sigh at that one.)

4. The entity is not forced to dissolve. The foreign entity must DIVEST their stake in the company. In other words, a foreign adversary cannot have control over the company that fulfills the previous requirements.

5. If the foreign adversary does not divest, then the company is banned out right.

6. The ban is on the app/website being offered or hosted on US platforms. You could still jailbreak your iphone to get it. You could still go outside the US to go to it. But US platforms cannot carry it.

7. The option is judicial review.

 

What’s my opinion on the Tiktok bill?

I’m torn. On one hand, I get itchy with any restricting legislation from the government. I’m fairly libertarian. However, when foreign adversaries are involved, I do not believe they should be afforded constitutional protection. They absolutely use our own rights against us, and have proven a track record of trying to destroy us through our own system.

I don’t like giving a red carpet (no pun intended) to the Chinese Communist Party. Especially when they a) Do not allow the same type of content in their own country and b) Do not allow American business free reign inside their own borders.

In fact, I’m not very comfortable with foreign adversaries having any ability to do major purchases and ownership within our nation. Whether it’s Tiktok, land, or even cranes at our major ports. Which, they just found boxes installed by the CCP on a bunch of cranes throughout our major ports. These boxes not only transmit data, but read wifi and hoover-up signals and send it back to the CCP. AAANNNDDD the boxes can control the cranes. But that’s totally fine. Because “libertarian capitalism.”

In a nutshell, I’m not as opposed to this bill as others. I think it’s narrow enough to avoid the usual triggers and traps that make us constitutional, conservative, libertarian, christian people nervous. Could it be a back door? Perhaps, but there seems to be a lot of difficulty in that.

REMEMBER: IT DOES NOT CALL FOR DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY. It requires the foreign entity to DIVEST (sell their shares and ownership) from the company.

To this, I fully support Rumble’s offer to purchase Tiktok from Bytedance. I think that would be an outstanding thing to have happen.

But, I could be wrong. It’s happened once before.

These opinions expressed are those of the author only, and do not officially reflect the opinions of Self-Evident Inc.