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

Mon Dec 9 07:13:31 PST 2024

Hi Joseph and Dave,

I’m sharing some information in my personal capacity. Yesterday, I watched
Donald Trump’s interview on NBC (link:
https://youtu.be/b607aDHUu2I?si=NNpWK3ccTesYr8Ap&t=3991).

During the interview, he was asked whether he would protect TikTok. He
acknowledged using TikTok as part of his election victory strategy with
youths who are major consumers of the TikTok app. While I’m no expert in
psychology or reading body language, Donald Trump's demeanor in that
interview suggested that he might consider giving TikTok a *political
lifeline* when he was asked if he would protect TikTok. Suppose Tiktok can
appeal before January 19th, just before Donald Trump is set to resume
office on January 20th that might likely be some action in his first 100
days in office to give it a political lifeline.

Best regards,
Caleb Ogundele

On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 8:42 AM Dr. Joseph Lorenzo Hall via
Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> 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. T*his 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.)
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As a Chapter Leader, you are automatically added to the Internet Society’s
> Chapter Leaders Community Group and the Chapter Delegates e-list. Based on
> ISOC’s legitimate interests to communicate with its chapter leaders, you
> will remain subscribed for the duration of your term and will be
> unsubscribed automatically when your term ends.
>
>
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://community.internetsociety.org.
> -
> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:
> https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>

-- 
*Caleb Ogundele*
Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20241209/51784cdc/attachment-0001.htm>