ByteDance prefers TikTok shutdown in US if legal options fail, sources say
reuters.com
reuters.com
"TikTok wasn’t a one-off case. Today, India has banned over 500 Chinese apps to date." [1]
If ByteDance won't sell, let them shutdown. It is truly baffling to me that anyone would defend a company's right to operate freely in the U.S. when it is controlled by a brutal autocracy that is also an emerging adversary.
[1] https://apnews.com/article/india-tiktok-ban-us-china-9ae5223...
So it was a toothless ban. By contrast, US wanted to have their cake and eat it too - keep TikTok and gain complete control over it. And while I know basically nothing about Indian law I'm fairly certain they have a much better legal argument in the US as well. So I don't think the situations have much in common.
[1] - https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IN&q=H...
The ban just doesn't apply to end users, but also to advertisers and content producers in the USA. That would have some impact, what is the point of distributing your app if you can't make any money on it.
> By contrast, US wanted to have their cake and eat it too - keep TikTok and gain complete control over it.
The law just specifies that it can't be owned by Chinese. A german company could buy it instead.
> And while I know basically nothing about Indian law I'm fairly certain they have a much better legal argument in the US as well.
That is making a lot of assumptions (I don't why they banned it, but I'm sure their reason must be better than the USA's...because they are India and the USA is worse?).
They are a self described democratic dictatorship with a system that openly and voluntarily chooses to sacrifice individual liberty and freedom for what they see as the collective good. That is their right as a sovereign power, but it is not a system I would like to live under. And any movement in this sort of direction is something that I think should be actively opposed.
[1] - http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/englishnpc/Constitution/node_282...
I think this system is pretty nice in lots of ways because it lets local representatives focus on local things, while high level representatives can focus on broad national interests. It also means peoples votes are always extremely important and you're going to be quite 'close' (literally and figuratively) to your representative. Of course the obvious downside is that in China you don't even get to directly vote for the President, but on the other hand - that is similar to many parliamentary systems used throughout Europe. Anyhow, it's an interesting system! Our first past the post district based system is completely broken and dysfunctional, but the people most benefited from it are the only ones who could fix it, so it's not going anywhere anytime soon. But it's fun to at least consider alternatives!
Technically, freedom of speech, religion, press is guaranteed in the Chinese constitution. But China is not a rule of law country so these rights are not enforced in any manner beyond how the government sees fit.
If the problem with TikTok is data collection, we should legislate bounds on all data collection and make everyone safer. If the problem with TikTok is addictive algorithmic feeds, we should legislate limits on those for all platforms and probably improve everyone's life.
maybe i would think differently if it wasnt banned everywhere else. and china didnt ban every western tech company.
isis recruitment apps, wholesale fent stright from china apps. whatever its my right! going against something blindly just because you want the freedom to do it whether or not you will is odd no? shouldnt you use context.
When an innovative foreign company comes in that Facebook/Google/Microsoft/Apple/Amazon/etc can't buy, the government ends up killing it.
Optimistically, this will create an opportunity for a new business to come in and fill the void left by TikTok's departure. Realistically, that's going to all get gobbled up by a big tech company in the end.
I do think it's a national security threat, and agree with the ban.
I just wish humans could figure out how to get along better, so that everything didn't have to be so politicized.
Can't be helped. Everything must play out this way. We're too weak to just beat them so we're forced to do this. But we still have to do it.
Most profits from social media globally is still US businesses (Meta, Google, Snap, etc).
> We're too weak to just beat them so we're forced to do this. But we still have to do it.
Completely agree, but...
Protectionism isn't always just to help local business succeed in the market place - sometimes it's strategic to ensure local skill exists (eg aerospace companies and nat'l defense), or some other similar localized outcome (eg. job creation, pride, etc). I think foreign companies controlling popular media distribution through an opaque and un-auditable algorithm is a propaganda and manipulation liability, so intervention is good. (obviously propaganda is still possible, just more localized).
Maybe in another four years when they're old enough to vote.
It would be on the buyer to prove / challenge it’s not the same algorithm and that would be almost impossible to prove
Who knows what TikTok is even worth without its highly addictive engine behind it
The measures that we have to take to operate and deliver our services in China is insanely difficult resulting in a diluted experience for our customers.
Until and unless China learns to play nice in the global arena, they should likewise be forcibly shut out in terms of access to foreign markets for their products and services.
From their point of view, the right strategic move is to shut it down. Even if every other country bans the app it doesn't impact them much. Also they hate doing things that make then look weak.
If they sell, they lose their influence. If they shut down, same thing.
Do you sell/license the software? Do you charge this new company for API access to the 'old' services?
I've had a really hard time trying to imagine how this could play out in fair agreement. I think the only real option is to exit the market.
This makes for a pithy statement, but is it actually true? Obviously the Chinese government has a lot of influence on Chinese companies, but do they actually dictate strategic direction like this?
Most recent attempt I can think of bucking that trend is Ant group and Jack Ma, who presumably still is in a room somewhere and not a dark hole in the ground.
> Any medium/large company in China has a government representative embedded in the exec team.
These two aren't the same thing. Obviously if you go directly against the Chinese government you're liable to disappear for a while, like Jack Ma. I just don't think the Chinese government gives that much of a shit about a social media company. Despite all the hysteria about TikTok being uniquely corrosive to society you can see most of the same content and trends on homegrown competitors like Instagram.
I also think if they pull out of the US, it's not improbable for the EU to also push TikTok to make changes.
(At the same time, it doesn't seem like China really cares for its tech industry, given how many times they've sabotaged it. It is possible they don't care about what happens with TikTok.)
So they wouldn’t be selling the US subsidiary, they’d be selling the entire golden goose.
Is it? Wikipedia seems to disagree:
> ByteDance Ltd. is a Chinese internet technology company headquartered in Haidian, Beijing and incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
The only mention of Singapore is in reference to launching a music service there.
Do you have information you can reference that isn't available in the Wikipedia article?
If they don't sell it's a really bad look for them.
I have to agree. There's too much money on the table to not sell.
RIP Vine
A person with a phone could go viral and reach thousands if not millions in a day.
Today, Tiktok has largely throttled the viral nature of their algorithm. You have spend money on paid advertising if you want to reach millions of people. Yes, there are still videos that get millions of views, but it is hit or miss now.