TikTok Ban Bill Is Patriot Act 2.0 Trojan Horse

Re:TikTok Ban Bill Is Patriot Act 2.0 Trojan Horse by yed on Thursday March 30, 2023 @01:55AM (#35368622)

“determine, direct, or decide important matters” is what makes this specific. This is no different than the traditional definition of “controlling interest”. The meaning of “controlling” in this context has a long legal precedent that is not overridden by this bill.

Edit: as a concrete example, I do not have a majority share in the company I work for but legally I have a “controlling interest” because I am an executive as well as owning shares. I know this because that is how I am required to fill out financial declarations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:TikTok Ban Bill Is Patriot Act 2.0 Trojan Horse by naravara on Thursday March 30, 2023 @09:33AM (#35372445)

> The meaning of “controlling” in this context has a long legal precedent that is not overridden by this bill.

Thank you. I am not a lawyer but watching all the internet panic over this bill has had me wanting to smash my head against a wall. I don't think people understand that our legal system is based on precedent* and not just whatever broad argument an internet person wants to make based on their own selective interpretation of the terms.

(*As long as we're not talking about voting rights or abortion.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:TikTok Ban Bill Is Patriot Act 2.0 Trojan Horse by mrguyorama on Thursday March 30, 2023 @12:37PM (#35375424)

I am for banning tiktok, but this bill seems to enable significantly more than that. Why shouldn't I be concerned about that?

[ Parent | on HN ]