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

Mon Dec 9 07:17:19 PST 2024

In another contrast to this body language which I'm no expert in reading,
he had a different view four years ago from this Trump interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY5_NmQ7WPQ&ab_channel=Reuters

On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 9:13 AM Caleb Ogundele <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>

-- 
*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/f086d713/attachment-0001.htm>