congress
Page: 2
Buying concert tickets could become an easier, more straightforward process after the U.S. House Subcommittee on Energy and Commerce passed the Speculative Ticketing Oversight and Prohibition (STOP) Act on Wednesday (Dec. 6). The bill is now eligible for a vote by the full House.
The STOP Act, which Rep. Gus Bilirakus (R-Fla.) called the “biggest ticket reform in years,” does far more than prevent speculative ticketing, though. The bill also addresses a range of deceptive ticketing practices and transparency issues that perplex, aggravate and annoy consumers.
For starters, the bill requires ticket sellers to conspicuously show the final ticket price at the beginning of the purchase process rather than at check-out. “The first price that you see when you order the ticket is the price that you pay — not a penny more,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) during Wednesday’s hearing.
The bill also ensures ticket buyers can get refunds when concerts are cancelled or postponed. Ticket buyers will have the option of receiving a full refund or, subject to availability, a replacement ticket if the event is postponed and rescheduled in the same or a “comparable” location.
“Consumers should not be left on the hook if an event is canceled or postponed and should have the option to receive a full refund or comparable ticket to a rescheduled show or game,” said Rep. Frank Pallone (C-NJ).
The STOP Act also helps consumers know if they’re buying a ticket from the primary seller or a secondary marketplace. The bill would require ticket sellers to provide buyers with a “a clear and conspicuous statement” that the provider is engaged in the secondary sale of the ticket. In addition, the secondary ticket marketplace cannot state that it is “affiliated with or endorsed by a venue, team, or artist” unless a partnership agreement exists.
Deceptive websites that could mislead ticket buyers are also banned. Ticket providers are prevented from using a domain name or subdomain that contains the name of a specific team, league, venue, performance or artist — including “substantially similar” and misspelled names — unless authorized by the owner of the name. Ticket sellers must also make their refund policies known up front.
Finally, as the name of the bill implies, the STOP Act bans speculative ticketing, in effect barringprimary and secondary ticketing marketplaces from selling tickets they do not possess.
For its part, Live Nation, owner of the country’s largest ticketing company, Ticketmaster, welcomes the new measures. “We’ve long supported a federal all-in pricing mandate, along with other measures including banning speculative ticketing and deceptive websites that trick fans,” the company said in a statement. “We’ll continue working with policymakers, advocating for even stronger reforms and enforcement to stop predatory practices that hurt fans and artists.”
Even if the STOP Act passes in the full House, the U.S. Senate must pass a version of the bill for it to become law. Two similar bills have already been introduced in the Senate. Like the STOP Act, the TICKET Act, introduced by Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), would prevent hidden ticket fees, require upfront pricing and stop speculative ticket selling. The Unlocking Ticketing Markets Act, introduced by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), would limit exclusive, multi-year ticketing contracts in live entertainment.
Live Nation officials are at an impasse with a powerful Senate subcommittee over demands that the concert promoter hand over confidential emails, contracts and memos detailing sensitive information about artist compensation.
Attorneys for Live Nation say they have already turned over more than 10,000 documents to investigators working for Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, or PSI, which Blumenthal chairs. Live Nation in-house counsel Dan Wall wrote on Live Nation’s corporate blog on Tuesday (Nov. 21) that the company is willing to hand over more sensitive documents if the PSI agrees to confidentiality protections to ensure the information is kept out of the public domain.
So far, Blumenthal has refused to agree to any restrictions requested by Live Nation and issued a subpoena for the confidential documents on Nov. 16. Live Nation officials plan to challenge the subpoena in court and are preparing for a lengthy legal battle to protect the confidentiality of its artist contracts if the two sides can’t reach an agreement.
“It is only in a subpoena enforcement action [before a federal judge] that Live Nation can assert its rights to protect the confidentiality of this information,” Wall wrote in the blog post.
Live Nation’s insistence on “confidentiality protections” is fairly routine, most legal experts agree, especially when it comes to court proceedings or investigations by government agencies. It’s also common practice for congressional investigators to agree to confidentiality rules while collecting evidence for congressional inquiries, but there’s no legal recourse if a member of Congress or staff discloses confidential information to the public.
News on Monday (Nov. 20) that Live Nation was being investigated by the powerful Department of Homeland Security and PSI surprised many music industry insiders. Created by President Harry Truman in 1941 to investigate wasteful defense spending after World War II, the PSI’s focus for much of its existence has been on matters of national security, including Korean War atrocities, the American Mafia’s influence on major labor unions and the government’s response to Hurricane Katrina.
Under Blumenthal’s leadership, the PSI has shifted its focus to consumer-oriented investigations, like the proposed merger of the PGA and the Saudi-backed LIV Golf league, equity within Medicare Advantage and sexual abuse in federal women’s prisons.
Blumenthal has also long been a critic of Live Nation and its 2010 merger with Ticketmaster, calling for the two companies to be split apart during a high-profile Senate hearing in January. According to a Nov. 16 letter from Blumenthal to Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino, the PSI officially began investigating Live Nation in March, in part for what Blumenthal calls “failure to combat artificially inflated demand fueled by bots in multiple, high-profile incidents, which resulted in consumers being charged exorbitant ticket prices.”
That description is the only public hint of what PSI is focusing on in its Live Nation investigation and doesn’t seem particularly damning of the concert promotion company. While bots, often operated by scalpers, do inflate demand for tickets — especially during high-profile onsales — and can lead to exorbitant ticket prices, it’s almost always Ticketmaster’s competitors in the secondary market who stand the most to gain.
Before Live Nation hands over any documents that contain “highly sensitive client information about artists, venues and others with whom we deal,” Wall wrote in the blog post, the company wants “binding confidentiality protections to prevent its misuse.”
Live Nation’s request might prove more difficult than the company’s leadership realizes, says Andrew Olmem, attorney and partner at Mayer Brown, which specializes in defending clients targeted by major investigations and congressional inquiries.
“Any documents provided to Congress are always vulnerable to public disclosure,” Olmem explains, noting that Congressional members and their staffers enjoy broad protections against criminal and civil liability under the U.S. Constitution’s speech and debate clause.
It is common for attorneys of clients targeted by Congressional inquiries to negotiate terms of documents’ use with investigators requesting the information, Olmem says. Many investigators, he adds, care deeply about reputational trust, knowing that violating confidentiality agreements with targets could make future targets less willing to voluntarily cooperate with document requests and significantly slow down investigations.
“But even if you secure such an agreement, members of Congress and their staffs can’t be liable for releasing confidential documents as part of their official legislative duties, such as submitting (the documents) into the congressional record or reading them on the House or Senate floors for the purpose of informing a legislative debate,” Olmem continues. “There are many circumstances in which members and their staff are incentivized to leak and do leak information for political purposes without consequences.”
HipHopWired Featured Video
Rep. Kevin McCarthy found himself on the wrong side of history after he was voted out of his Speaker of the House position, the first time that has ever happened in congressional history. While Kevin McCarthy says he will not seek reelection, a mad scramble is underway by the Republic Party to vote for his replacement.
The Washington Post and its political reporting team have been following the ordeal of Kevin McCarthy and the motion to vacate launched by Rep. Matt Gaetz, which adds to a growing instance of infighting between the GOP.
Gaetz filed the motion on October 2 to force a vote on McCarthy’s removal from the Speaker post. McCarthy may have saved the role had he worked with House Democrats to secure their support but he was unwilling to do so for political concessions. After an hour of debate between Gaetz and Rep. Tom Cole, voting commenced with the motion leading to oust the speaker at a vote count of 216-210.
In McCarthy’s stead, Rep. Patrick McHenry, reportedly an ally of McCarthy, was named as speaker pro tempore in an interim role.
Rep. Kevin McCarthy has maintained that Rep. Gaetz launched the motion to take attention away from the ethics probe against him and that the action was “personal.”
“It had nothing to do about spending,” McCarthy said. “It all was about getting attention. I mean, we’re getting email fundraisers from him.”
—
Photo: Getty
Proponents of the Help Independent Tracks Succeed (HITS) Act are making a renewed effort to get the bill through Congress.
On Wednesday (Sept. 27), the Recording Academy and the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) sent a letter to House Ways and Means Committee chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) and ranking member Richard Neal (D-MA) urging them to add the bill to end-of-year tax legislation.
The HITS Act would provide an extra tax break to musicians, technicians and producers for recording sessions, allowing them to deduct 100% of recording expenses up to $150,000 on their taxes in the year they’re incurred. That would be a change from the current law, which requires music creators and labels to amortize those expenses over the economic life of a sound recording, a period that usually ranges between three and four years.
“The bill is designed and tailored to specifically incentivize independent artists, songwriters and labels to produce new music, sparking important creative investments in countless music small businesses across the country,” reads the letter, signed by Recording Academy chief advocacy and public policy officer Todd Dupler and A2IM president/CEO Richard James Burgess. “This targeted approach makes the HITS Act a fiscally responsible investment in the American creative economy.”
The letter goes on to point out that film, TV and live theatrical productions all enjoy the option of fully deducting production costs in the year they’re incurred and argues that music productions should get the same treatment. For independent creators and labels, being forced to amortize expenses “slows down their reinvestment in new projects that can fuel growth,” the letter adds.
Speaking to Billboard last year, Burgess put it in starker terms, noting that specifically for independents, “getting $150,000 per project [that can be] written off against your taxes in the year that you incurred it, could really make a difference between being able to make another record next year or not.”
The bipartisan HITS Act was first introduced in the House on July 31, 2020 (followed by a companion bill in the Senate on Dec. 3, 2020), though it failed to pass as part of the two pandemic relief packages or as part of the $3.5 billion budget reconciliation package known as Build Back Better, which was ultimately halved and renamed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 before being signed into law in August 2022. A similar lobbying effort at the end of last year to pass the bill ahead of the changeover to a new, split Congress — Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in January while Democrats held the Senate — also failed.
Read the full letter below.
Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Neal:
On behalf of independent music makers and record labels we call on the Committee of Ways and Means to advance into law the bipartisan and bicameral Help Independent Tracks Succeed (HITS) Act (H.R. 1259) as part of any tax policy package considered before the end of the year. The HITS Act is a low-cost and commonsense modification to existing U.S. tax law that will incentivize the production of new sound recordings and songwriter demos by allowing qualified productions to deduct 100% of their costs upfront. With an annual deduction limit of $150,000, the bill is designed and tailored to specifically incentivize independent artists, songwriters and labels to produce new music, sparking important creative investments in countless music small businesses across the country. This targeted approach makes the HITS Act a fiscally responsible investment in the American creative economy.
The HITS Act also brings much-needed parity to the tax code for all creative industries. Currently, under Sec. 181 of the Internal Revenue Code, qualified film, television, and live theatrical productions may elect to fully deduct new production costs in the year they are incurred. Music production, which occurs in every state and congressional district, deserves the same treatment. Instead of being able to fully deduct production expenses in the year they occur, independent music makers must currently amortize production expenses for tax purposes over the full economic life of their creation. For small creators and the small businesses that invest in their careers, this timing difference slows down their reinvestment in new projects that can fuel growth. The HITS Act harmonizes the tax code and ensures that all the major creative industries are treated similarly.
As you consider how to best craft comprehensive tax legislation this year, the music community strongly urges you to include the HITS Act in any vehicle. It represents exactly the type of bipartisan, bicameral, and non-controversial economic investment that Congress should be proud to support. Passage of H.R. 1259 is a smart and simple step that will make a lasting difference for countless independent music creators and music small businesses.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Dr. Richard James BurgessPresident and CEOAmerican Association of Independent Music (A2IM)
Todd DuplerChief Advocacy and Public Policy OfficerRecording Academy
Independent musicians will have more power to negotiate with artificial intelligence developers over “fairer rates and terms for the use of their music” if a newly introduced version of the Protect Working Musicians Act passes the U.S. House, according to Rep. Deborah Ross (D-N.C.).
“AI threatens the creator — finding the person or entity that has co-opted your work and turned it into something else and then going after them is so onerous,” Ross, who sponsored the revised act and sits on the House Judiciary Committee, says in a phone interview from Washington, D.C. “That’s one of the reasons for this bill — to allow people to do this collaboratively. We need to do this sooner than later. We’re seeing this threat every single day.”
The Protect Working Musicians Act, which Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) introduced in October 2021 a few months before he left Congress, would allow indie artists to collectively bargain for royalty rates with streaming giants such as Spotify and Apple Music. As it stands, the major labels that own most worldwide master recordings have enormous negotiating power to set rates; the act would “give the smaller independent more of a voice,” says Jen Jacobsen, executive director of the Artist Rights Alliance, which worked with Ross on revising the bill.
Ross picked up the bill when Deutch announced he would not return to the House, then held hearings with indie artists in her district, which includes Raleigh. Since then, Ross says, “The AI issue has become even more important.” The revised act would allow artists to behave like plaintiffs in a class-action suit, she adds, “fighting for their rights” with a central attorney.
“Our work is being scraped and ingested and exploited without us even knowing,” Jacobsen says. “Adding the AI platforms seemed like a relevant and important thing to do.”
Writers and artists have warned for months that AI could transform their ideas into new works with no way to get paid for the usage. In April, “Heart On My Sleeve,” an AI-created song that mimics the voices of Drake and The Weeknd, landed millions of TikTok, Spotify and YouTube plays. At the time, Sting told the BBC: “The building blocks of music belong to us, to human beings. That’s going to be a battle we all have to fight in a couple of years: defending our human capital against AI.”
“Musicians are really worried about this — not just the big-name ones, but small artists, too. Small ones, especially,” Jorgensen says. “The most important thing for this bill is that small, independent artists and record labels need to be recognized and have each others’ backs.”
It’s unclear when the House might vote on the revised bill — or if it would pass. “As you can see in Congress, lots of bills aren’t passing — like the budget!” Ross says. “But this has been a very bipartisan issue in the judiciary committee. It’s the perfect time to bring these issues up.”
The Internet was sent ablaze on Wednesday (July 26) when a former Air Force intelligence officer testified in Congress, claiming under oath that the U.S. government secretly operates a “multi-decade” reverse engineering program of recovered vessels, adding that they’ve allegedly gotten ahold of non-human “biologics” from crash sites. Explore Explore See latest videos, charts and news […]
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: Drew Angerer / Getty
After decades of speculation and conspiracy theories galore, an ex-intel officer for the United States of America finally revealed that yes, the U.S. has UFO technology and extraterrestrial bodies in their possession, but apparently no one cares in 2023.
According to AFP, the historic revelation happened yesterday (July 27) when David Grusch spoke to a congressional committee and confirmed that the U.S. not only recovered crashed UFO’s and the “biologicals” that piloted them, but are also reverse-engineering their tech at their government bases. While he was still hesitant to go into detail about what he knows exactly (he doesn’t want to disappear), he did say that most of what we assumed about UFO’s (a.k.a UAPs) and our governements involvement in covering them up is true and he and others have been threatened about talking about what they know.
AFP reports:
Pressed for details in the course of the hearing, Grusch repeatedly said he could not comment in a public setting because the information is classified.
He said the US government is hiding information on UAPs not only from the public but from Congress, and that he personally interviewed people with direct knowledge of non-human craft.
“My testimony is based on information I’ve been given by individuals with a longstanding track record of legitimacy and service to this country — many of whom also shared compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation and classified oral testimony,” Grusch told lawmakers.
Unfortunately for Grusch, outside of his own testimony he himself could not provide of this evidence.
Still, the whistleblower decided it was time he reveal to congress what he knows on the subject, though naturally we’ll probably never get to see the pictures and other forms of evidence that would surely prove that there are aliens amongst us. Whether or not they’re actually working within our government on some X-File‘s sh*t is anyone’s guess, but they probably are.
What do y’all think of David Grusch’s testimony to congress? Let us know in the comments section below.
HipHopWired Radio
Our staff has picked their favorite stations, take a listen…
Reps. Ted W. Lieu (D-CA) and Ben Cline (R-VA) have joined together to re-launch and co-chair the bipartisan Congressional Songwriters Caucus to focus on advancing policies that support independent songwriters and strengthen copyright protections.
The new caucus has support from the Recording Academy, Nashville Songwriters Association International, BMI, ASCAP and the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), according to a press release. No specific names of independent songwriters were included in the release, and a representative for Lieu has not responded to Billboard’s requests for more information.
The caucus was originally formed in 2003 by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) when she served as a House representative for Tennessee. According to her website, part of her focus at the time was cracking down on China’s intellectual property theft and how that affected songwriters and other creatives.
The interests of musicians is also represented in Congress with the Recording Arts and Sciences Congressional Caucus, which was established in 2005 and continues today, helmed by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and new Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY).
Hailing from Southern California, Rep. Lieu says he understands first hand how “talented songwriters… contribute to so much of our culture and society. I’m thrilled to join Congressman Cline in co-chairing the new bipartisan Congressional Songwriter’s Caucus, which will work to support America’s brilliant songwriters by ensuring they can protect their work and make a living doing what they love. Music contributes so much to our way of life, and we must ensure those creating it are compensated fairly. I’m grateful to the numerous songwriter advocacy organizations who’ve partnered with us on the creation of this caucus and look forward to working together to support our artists.”
“Making art, specifically music, is a powerful way to leave a mark on the world,” says Rep. Cline. “It’s a part of our everyday lives, from what we listen to on our commutes in the morning, to the music we select for our most important life events, such as birthdays, weddings, and funerals. But today’s modern music landscape can make it more difficult for certain artists, especially independent songwriters, to make a living. That is why I’m proud to co-chair the Congressional Songwriters Caucus, which will play an important role in promoting the songwriting community by working to ensure the creative rights of songwriters are protected.”
“It All Begins With A Song,” says Bart Herbison, executive director of NSAI. “the entire music ecosystem. Since the Songwriters Caucus was initially launched 20 years ago, technology has completely changed the way music is delivered. American songwriters still face challenges in the digital era and we are very grateful to Congressmen Cline and Lieu for their bipartisan support.”
“On behalf of our over one million affiliates, I’d like to thank Representatives Cline and Lieu for co-chairing the Congressional Songwriters Caucus. Both have always been champions for creators, and we are in excellent hands with them leading the charge for songwriters and composers on the Hill. We stand ready to work with them to ensure creators are supported by strong copyright law and that they are fairly compensated for their work,” adds Mike O’Neill, president and CEO of BMI.
“Songwriters are the foundation of America’s vibrant music industry, and we appreciate Representatives Cline and Lieu recognizing the importance of ensuring we have champions in Congress. As technology transforms the music landscape, ASCAP looks forward to engaging with members of the Congressional Songwriters’ Caucus to protect the rights of American music creators and defend the value of their hard work and creativity,” says Paul Williams, president of ASCAP.
“We applaud Representatives Cline and Lieu for leading the Congressional Songwriters Caucus and we are excited about today’s launch. NMPA is the leading advocate for music publishers and their songwriter partners and we greatly look forward to working with the Caucus to advance policy interests that will protect creators and ensure that songwriters thrive,” says NMPA president and CEO David Israelite.
“The Recording Academy is proud to support the re-launch of the Congressional Songwriters Caucus which helps connect songwriters and composers with lawmakers to ensure that their unique interests are heard and understood. We are grateful to the new Caucus Co-Chairs, Representatives Ben Cline and Ted Lieu, for their support and leadership and we look forward to working with stakeholders across the songwriter community to advance the Caucus forward,” says Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr.
HipHopWired Featured Video
The Restoring Artistic Protection Act, largely known as the RAP Act, was previously introduced by Congressmen Hank Johnson (GA-04) and Jamaal Bowman (NY-16). If signed into law, the RAP Act would offer artists some protections regarding their lyrics being used to try a criminal case in court.
On April 28, Congressmen Johnson and Bowman issued a press release announcing their attention to bring the RAP Act bill back to the House floor for debate. The bill was introduced in the 117th Congress and is the first of its kind to reach the federal level.
From the press release:
“This legislation is long overdue,” said Congressman Johnson. “For too long, artists – particularly young Black artists – have been unfairly targeted by prosecutors who use their lyrics as evidence of guilt, even though there is no evidence that the lyrics are anything more than creative expression. When you allow music and creativity to be silenced, you’re opening the door for other realms of free speech to be curtailed as well. The government should not be able to silence artists simply because they write, draw, sing, or rap about controversial or taboo subjects. The Restoring Artistic Protection Act (RAP Act) would protect artists’ First Amendment rights by limiting the admissibility of their lyrics as evidence in criminal and civil proceedings.”
“Rap, hip-hop and every lyrical musical piece is a beautiful form of art and expression that must be protected,” said Congressman Jamaal Bowman Ed.D. (NY-16). “I am proud to introduce the RAP Act alongside Rep. Hank Johnson. Our judicial system disparately criminalizes Black and brown people, including Black and brown creativity. For example, Tommy Munsdwell Canady is a young 17-year-old kid serving a life sentence whose conviction heavily relied upon lyrics he wrote. I was deeply moved to hear that Mr. Canady continues to pursue his art in the face of our carceral systems that would otherwise stifle Black art. He is not an outlier. Evidence shows when juries believe lyrics to be rap lyrics, there’s a tendency to presume it’s a confession, whereas lyrics for other genres of music are understood to be art, not factual reporting. This act would ensure that our evidentiary standards protect the First Amendment right to freedom of expression. We cannot imprison our talented artists for expressing their experiences nor will we let their creativity be suppressed.”
The press release added that over 500 criminal cases have used rap lyrics in court against defendants.
A bevy of music industry figures, such as Kevin Liles and groups like the Black Music Action Coalition have placed their support behind the RAP Act bill.
The press release can be viewed here, along with the bill.
—
Photo: Getty
The CEO of TikTok faced a grilling Thursday from a U.S. congressional committee in a rare public appearance where made his own case for why the hugely popular video-sharing app shouldn’t be banned.
Shou Zi Chew’s testimony came at a crucial time for the company, which has acquired 150 million American users but is under increasing pressure from U.S. officials. TikTok and its parent company ByteDance have been swept up in a wider geopolitical battle between Beijing and Washington over trade and technology.
“Mr. Chew, you are here because the American people need the truth about the threat TikTok poses to our national and personal security,” Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican, said in her opening statement. “TikTok has repeatedly chosen a path for more control, more surveillance and more manipulation.”
Chew, a 40-year-old Singapore native, told the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that TikTok prioritizes the safety of its young users and denied allegations that the app is a national security risk. He reiterated the company’s plan to protect U.S. user data by storing all such information on servers maintained and owned by the server giant Oracle.
“Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country,” Chew said.
On Wednesday, the company sent dozens of popular TikTokers to Capitol Hill to lobby lawmakers to preserve the platform. It has also been putting up ads all over Washington that tout promises of securing users’ data and privacy and creating a safe platform for its young users.
TikTok has been dogged by claims that its Chinese ownership means user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government or that it could be used to promote narratives favorable to the country’s Communist leaders.
In a rare, bipartisan effort to reign in the power and influence of a major social media platform, Republican and Democratic lawmakers pressed Chew on a host of topics, ranging from TikTok’s content moderation practices, how the company plans to secure American data from Beijing, and that it admits spying on journalists.
Watch the Hearing Below:
In 2019, the Guardian had reported TikTok was instructing its moderators to censor videos that mention Tiananmen Square and other images unfavorable to the Chinese government. The platform says it has since changed its moderation practices.
ByteDance admitted in December that it fired four employees last summer who accessed data on two journalists, as well as other people connected to them, while attempting to track down the source of a leaked report about the company.
For its part, TikTok has been trying to distance itself from its Chinese origins, saying that 60% percent of its parent company ByteDance is owned by global institutional investors such as Carlyle Group. ByteDance was founded by Chinese entrepreneurs in Beijing in 2012. Responding to a Wall Street Journal report, China said it would oppose any U.S. attempts to force ByteDance to sell the app.
But Chew pushed back against the idea that TikTok’s ownership was an issue in itself.
“Trust is about actions we take. We have to earn that trust with decisions we make for our company and our products and potential security, privacy content, manipulation concerns raised about TikTok are really not unique to us” Chew said. “Ownership is not at the core of addressing these concerns.”
A U.S. ban on an app would be unprecedented and it’s unclear how the government would enforce it.
Experts say officials could try to force Apple and Google to remove TikTok from their app stores, preventing new users from downloading it as well as preventing existing users from updating it, ultimately rendering it useless.
The U.S. could also block access to TikTok’s infrastructure and data, seize its domain names or force internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon to filter TikTok data traffic, said Ahmed Ghappour, a criminal law and computer security expert who teachers at Boston University School of Law.
But a tech savvy user could still get around restrictions by using a virtual private network to make it appear the user is in another country where it’s not blocked, he said.
To avoid a ban, TikTok has been trying to sell officials on a $1.5 billion plan called Project Texas, which routes all U.S. user data to domestic servers owned and maintained by software giant Oracle. Under the project, access to U.S. data is managed by U.S. employees through a separate entity called TikTok U.S. Data Security, which employs 1,500 people, is run independently of ByteDance and would be monitored by outside observers.
As of October, all new U.S. user data was being stored inside the country. The company started deleting all historic U.S. user data from non-Oracle servers this month, in a process expected to be completed later this year, Chew said.
Generally, researchers have said TikTok behaves like other social media companies when it comes to data collection. In an analysis released in 2021, the University of Toronto’s nonprofit Citizen Lab found TikTok and Facebook collect similar amounts of user data valuable for advertisers.
To block such tracking, Congress, the White House, U.S. armed forces and more than half of U.S. states have banned the use of the app from official devices.
But wiping away all the data tracking associated with the platform might prove to be difficult. In a report released this month, the Cybersecurity company Feroot said so-called tracking pixels from ByteDance, which collect user information, were found on 30 U.S state websites, including some where the app has been banned for official use.
Other countries including Denmark, Canada, Great Britain and New Zealand, along with the European Union, have already banned TikTok from devices issued to government employees.
David Kennedy, a former government intelligence officer who runs the cybersecurity company TrustedSec, agrees with restricting TikTok access on government-issued phones because they might contain sensitive information. A nationwide ban, however, might be too extreme, he said. He also wondered where it might lead.
“We have Tesla in China, we have Microsoft in China, we have Apple in China. Are they going to start banning us now?” Kennedy said. “It could escalate very quickly.”