[Chapter-delegates] TikTok Ban. How should ISOC respond?

[Dr. Joseph Lorenzo Hall]

Also, our amicus project intervened this past May in the Montana Tiktok case in the USA (Alario et al, Tiktok v. Knudsen), which was a state-level app ban of Tiktok aimed at app stores. I say "was" as the case was mooted (stopped) when the federal divestment ban law was signed.

In our brief we described how this ban would undermine foundational aspects of the Internet and is technically unworkable. Dan York and John Morris published a blog post describing the case and our argument:

https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2024/05/montanas-tiktok-ban-breaking-the-internet-and-undermining-online-privacy/

And here is the PDF of the brief itself (it should be very accessible for a legal brief, if I do say so!):

https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Amicus-Brief-TikTok-v.-Knudsen_05.06.24.pdf



--

JLH, Internet Society, hall at isoc.org ( https://josephhall.org/ )
________________________________
From: Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Dr. Joseph Lorenzo Hall via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 09:07
To: ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>; Dave Burstein <daveb at dslprime.com>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] TikTok Ban. How should ISOC respond?


Hi Dave,



This development is concerning, and for those legally inclined, the outcome from the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Friday was a bit surprising.



(The Court upheld the underlying forced divestment law as constitutional, despite a "strict scrutiny" challenge under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. This was based on national security grounds, with the Court showing heavy deference to the government, despite the lack of public evidence regarding the dangers to national security.)



In addition to the 2023 statement we crafted, which addresses the dangers of app and service bans more generally, you should know that we issued two strong statements in 2020 specifically regarding proposed WeChat and TikTok bans, as well as the somewhat innocently named US Clean Network program (which would have denied all interconnection in the USA with Chinese networks):



  *   https://www.internetsociety.org/news/statements/2020/internet-society-u-s-administration-ban-of-tiktok-and-wechat-is-a-direct-attack-on-the-internet/
  *   https://www.internetsociety.org/news/statements/2020/internet-society-statement-on-u-s-clean-network-program/



We are closely monitoring the current situation in the USA, particularly since TikTok may appeal to the US Supreme Court. The incoming President appears inclined to "save" TikTok, but the details of how that will happen remain unclear. As the relevant ISOC leader here, think it's important to keep an eye on the technical implementation of any blocking order, as that could become complicated and is precisely where we are most concerned about unintended consequences.



I’m not sure it’s time for another public statement (especially about a lower court's First Amendment ruling), given that there are still many legal avenues in motion, but maybe you had other ideas in mind. We would love to hear any ideas from Chapters and our community regarding action or engagement.



Cheers,

Joe Hall



--

JLH, Internet Society, hall at isoc.org ( https://josephhall.org/ )



________________________________

From: Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Dave Burstein via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 02:28
To: ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: [Chapter-delegates] TikTok Ban. How should ISOC respond?



170 million Americans use TikTok, Facebook's only major international competitor. This is the largest Internet blockage in Western history. The proponents—and the court—believe it is a major security problem that justifies blocking the Internet.



(Because we have a strong, clear position on the issue - below - this note should have come from the Chair or CEO. But maybe it's good for the chapters to take the lead more often.)



>From the Times: TikTok Faces U.S. Ban After Losing Bid to Overturn New Law
The law will ban the video app in the United States by Jan. 19 if its owner, ByteDance, does not sell it to a non-Chinese company.
--------------------

Conveniently, we have almost nothing of substance planned at Wednesday's board meeting. We can spend several hours discussing what ISOC's policy should be.



ISOC took a strong position on this issue in 2023. https://www.internetsociety.org/news/statements/2023/specific-app-and-service-bans-are-fragmenting-the-internet/



Is it possible for the Internet Society to take action when the problem is our home country?

Ted, Sally - can our pr department put together a press call on zoom to address this openly and transparently?



Here's our 2023 statement. It's very clear and to the point.



Specific App and Service Bans are Fragmenting the Internet
Increasing government actions to block or ban specific web services or applications are fragmenting the Internet.

Because of how the Internet works, top-down interference with specific services and technologies on the Internet will likely damage interoperation and tend to splinter the Internet into smaller, less-connected islands.

As the Internet and the services on it become more important, people increasingly depend on them. ...

Some governments claim their actions are necessary for national security–when citizen use of some applications or services could lead to wide scale theft of personal data, exposure of national security assets, or creation of numerous in-country landing points for a widespread cybersecurity attack, among other risks. But the idea that these risks are somehow unique to a particular application or service is poorly founded: the same attacks could be as easily embedded in another permitted application. Since the Internet is such a flexible technology, any necessary defense of national security has to come from preventing the attacks no matter how they come from the Internet. National security that supposedly comes from banning a particular application is a security blanket made entirely of holes.

Governments should avoid service or applications specific bans, which undermine security and access to opportunities on the world’s greatest communications resource. Instead of banning a particular platform or application based on non-technical criteria<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7754> like country of origin or ownership, countries should be transparent about risks and raise the privacy and security standards for all online services and app stores to mitigate broader potential threats to critical infrastructure and services from end-user devices.

-----------------------

(It's particularly important for the Chair to get involved. The last time this came up was when the chapters asked ISOC to take a position on the cutoff of Internet service in Gaza and the chair was asked to comment. The board has a fiduciary responsibility it shouldn't duck.)




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20241209/311d75e7/attachment-0001.htm>