Connect with us

Technologies

TikTok Is Suing Montana Over App Ban: What It Means For You

The company behind the popular video-sharing app says the state’s ban violates the First Amendment.

TikTok is striking back against Montana’s recently passed ban on the popular video app. On Monday, TikTok filed to legally challenge the ban in US district court.

“We are challenging Montana’s unconstitutional TikTok ban to protect our business and the hundreds of thousands of TikTok users in Montana,” a representative for TikTok said in a statement sent to CNET. “We believe our legal challenge will prevail based on an exceedingly strong set of precedents and facts.”

On May 17, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte signed Senate Bill 419, making his state the first in the nation to ban TikTok over concerns related to its Chinese parent company, ByteDance. 

“The Chinese Communist Party using TikTok to spy on Americans, violate their privacy, and collect their personal, private, and sensitive information is well-documented,” Gianforte said in a press release announcing the ban. “Today, Montana takes the most decisive action of any state to protect Montanans’ private data and sensitive personal information from being harvested by the Chinese Communist Party.”

TikTok reports that it has more than 150 million monthly active users in the US. And a 2022 Pew study found that 67% of US teens aged 13 to 17 said they used the app, with 16% of all teens saying they use it almost “constantly.” So can Montana, the eighth-smallest US state by population, really ban its just over 1 million people from using the app? It’s complicated.

For more on data privacy, check out CNET’s list of the best VPN services and how to stop iPhone apps from tracking you.

What does TikTok say in its legal complaint?

TikTok’s statement lists multiple reasons why the company believes the ban is unlawful, beginning by citing the First Amendment, which forbids government restrictions on free speech.

The company says the Montana law is “unconstitutionally shutting down the forum for speech for all speakers on the app and singling these speakers out for disfavored treatment with the content-based rationale that videos on TikTok are harmful to minors.”

TikTok also says the claims that US user data is being used by the Chinese government involve foreign affairs and national security, and should be dealt with at the federal, not state level. It argues that the state-specific ban on its national platform risks disrupting the flow of travel and commerce between states, and also says it’s unconstitutional that TikTok is singled out for harsh penalties based on speculation about its data security and content moderation.

TikTok is seeking a declaratory judgment and order “invalidating and preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendant from enforcing the TikTok Ban.”

A representative for the Montana governor didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

Is banning TikTok really going to protect data privacy?

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit digital rights group, called the ban “unconstitutional” in a Twitter thread.

And an article from March published on the EFF site pointed out that nearly all social media platforms and online businesses collect a good deal of personal data from users, while noting that the surveillance and censorship practices of China make TikTok a special case.

“Still, the best solution to these problems is not to single out one business or country for a ban,” the EFF wrote. “Rather, we must enact comprehensive consumer data privacy legislation. By reducing the massive stores of personal data collected by all businesses, TikTok included, we will reduce opportunities for all governments, China included, to buy or steal this data.

Jason Kelley, the EFF’s acting director for activism, told CNET in a phone interview that the ban violates the First Amendment and won’t protect data privacy, but will put an “enormous burden” on Montana as it attempts to enforce the law. But he doesn’t think that’s the point.

“It’s not a law that is intended to be implemented,” he said. “It will waste a lot of taxpayer money and be litigated in court.”

Why is Montana banning TikTok?

TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, is headquartered in Beijing. Some fear that data acquired by the app could be accessed by the Chinese Communist Party, and could pose a national security threat to the United States if the company is forced to share US user data with the Chinese government.

In November, FBI Director Christopher Wray said the app could be used to “control data collection on millions of users, or control the recommendation algorithm, which could be used [to] influence operations if they so choose, or to control software on millions of devices.” FCC Commissioner Brian Carr last year called the app a “sophisticated surveillance tool.”

The ban wouldn’t take effect if TikTok is sold to a company not based in “any country designated as a foreign adversary” by the US government.

Montana’s ban is the first of its kind by a state, but in December, US lawmakers banned the app from government devices, and other countries have also restricted the app.

What does TikTok have to say about the China charges?

TikTok has denied that it feeds information to the Chinese government.

“There is no truth to the [Montana] governor’s claim that TikTok is associated with the Chinese government,” a representative for TikTok said in its first statement after the ban was announced. “The Chinese Communist Party has neither direct nor indirect control of ByteDance or TikTok. ByteDance is a private, global company, with roughly 60 percent owned by global institutional investors, 20 percent owned by the company’s founders, and 20 percent owned by employees — including thousands of Americans.”

TikTok Chief Executive Officer Shou Chew testified before Congress back in March. He said TikTok has been working on an initiative called Project Texas, which he said would create “a firewall that seals off protected US user data from unauthorized foreign access,” and include oversight by a US company. 

What does the Montana TikTok ban involve?

The Montana police aren’t going to break down citizens’ doors and stop Billings or Butte teens from uploading or watching quirky dances or funny cat videos. Instead of going after individual users, the state’s attempting to prohibit mobile application stores from offering TikTok within the state. 

So while the law does technically prohibit downloads of TikTok, it doesn’t mention fining regular citizens, just TikTok itself or whichever app store, Apple for iOS devices or Google for Android devices, allows Montanans access to it. The proposed fines are hefty — $10,000 per day for each time someone accesses TikTok, “is offered the ability” to access it, or downloads it. Again, those fines wouldn’t apply to the users, but the companies that allow them to get TikTok.

However, the bill also includes even stricter rules for state employees using government devices. It says that “effective June 1, no executive agency, board, commission, or other executive branch entity, official, or employee of the State of Montana shall download or access social media applications that provide personal information or data to foreign adversaries on government-issued devices or while connected to the state network.” And third-party firms conducting business for, or on behalf of, Montana are now prohibited “from using applications with ties to foreign adversaries.”

How will Montana enforce the TikTok ban?

This is unclear. The prohibitions on state employees and agencies kicks in June 1, but the main part of the ban won’t take effect until Jan. 1, 2024. That gives the state some time to figure things out, and in the meantime, there will surely be lawsuits, likely from TikTok itself, and perhaps entities such as the ACLU.

But as far as enforcement itself, there are some idea. The Associated Press reports that Montana’s attorney general has suggested the technology used to restrict online gambling apps could be used. Violations can be reported by anyone, and the state then sends a cease-and-desist letter to the company.

Technologies

Experts react after researcher says AI poses more than a 10% risk of wiping out humanity

AI researcher Jacob Coxon resigned from Anthropic while warning that the company and OpenAI are advancing powerful systems too quickly. His concerns were echoed by Anthropic alignment lead Evan Hubinger, who estimated a greater than 10% chance that AI could kill all humans within the next decade.

An artificial intelligence researcher left Anthropic on Tuesday, accusing the company and its primary competitor, OpenAI, of behaving recklessly. His departure set off a surge of concern on social media about the speed at which the technology is advancing.

Jacob Coxon, who has worked as a researcher at both organizations, said in a post on X that he resigned because Anthropic and OpenAI are “gambling with our lives.” He said the people developing AI “earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.”

“Do not underestimate the power of this technology,” Coxon wrote. “These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, which has drawn more than 70 million views, highlights a long-running debate in Silicon Valley over whether AI can be developed and controlled safely. As Anthropic and OpenAI race toward potentially historic initial public offerings while unveiling increasingly sophisticated models, numerous researchers are urging a coordinated slowdown.

OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki said in a blog post Sunday that no AI company has “solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to continue responsibly scaling at maximum speed for much longer.” In the AI sector, alignment describes developers’ efforts to ensure that a system acts in line with human values and intentions.

“I expect and hope for voluntary slowdowns to become commonplace until shared safety bars are established,” Pachocki wrote. “And I believe that international coordination on future AI development needs to become a top priority for governments around the world.”

Coxon’s post Tuesday also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self-improvement, in which an AI system could design and build its successor without human involvement. Although recursive self-improvement is not currently possible, Anthropic, OpenAI and other companies have warned that it could make it easier for people to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon wrote. “They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment lead, supported Coxon’s remarks in a post on X late Tuesday.

“Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.”

Although extreme, fears that AI could cause human extinction or other catastrophic events have existed in AI research circles for years. In 2023, prominent researchers and executives, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, signed a statement declaring that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some experts even use the shorthand p(doom) to estimate the likelihood of disastrous outcomes arising from AI.

Hubinger was also among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed an open letter titled “Pacing the Frontier” in July. The letter called on the U.S. government to create the tools needed to support an effort to “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development.”

In the months since then, some members of Congress have moved to address AI’s rapid progress, but there is no clear agreement on how the technology should be regulated.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the FRONTIER Act, legislation designed to create a framework for overseeing the deployment of advanced AI models. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until the federal government puts safety rules in place. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway,” Trahan wrote in a post on X Wednesday. “It’s past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job.”

Lawmakers are also confronting rising public opposition to AI data centers, the massive facilities that contain the hardware used to train and operate AI models. The backlash has intensified to the point that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or NRSC, said last month that data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have done a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’re going to have to take some of the blame, and they are going to have to convince the American people that all the benefits will not accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after the G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Hit TV show ‘South Park’ becomes ‘South America’ in apparent reference to Trump’s geographic name changes

Show creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said in a statement that they were “inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google.”

Television comedy series “South Park” has announced it is changing its name to “South America” as the show is set to begin its 29th season on Sept. 16.

The show’s creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said, “Inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are changing the name of South Park to SOUTH AMERICA. We especially want to thank our parent company Paramount — a Skydance Capitulation.”

Parker and Stone’s statement comes after U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America amid a trade spat with Canada. Canadian officials said they will not recognize the new name.

Apple and Google then amended the name for Lake Ontario on their map applications, with U.S. users seeing “Lake America,” while Canadian users saw “Lake Ontario.”

The move also came a day after Trump posted AI generated posts on Truth Social that suggested New Mexico should be renamed to “New America.”

Last year, the president used an executive order to change the name for the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, drawing international opposition.

“South Park” won an Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode which premiered last year and parodies Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” line comes after the $8 billion merger between parent company Paramount and Skydance, which was approved by the Federal Communications Commission last year after Paramount settled a lawsuit brought by Trump for $16 million.

Trump had alleged an interview that aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris, was deceptively edited.

Paramount subsidiary CBS News in July 2025 said it was canceling comedian Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show,” citing financial reasons, just days after Colbert accused Paramount of paying Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode of the show aired in May.

Paramount and the White House didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump says he has no regrets about starting the Iran war as U.S. dials up economic pressure

Speaking to Fox News presenter Laura Ingraham, Trump said that he would have attacked Iran despite the impact on the midterm elections.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he has no regrets about starting the Iran war and added that “If I had it to do again, I would do exactly what I did.”

Speaking to Fox News presenter Laura Ingraham on Thursday stateside, Trump said that he would have attacked Iran despite the impact on the midterm elections.

“If we hadn’t done Iran, you would be cruising to midterms victory right now,” Ingraham told Trump, to which Trump replied “supposing we were cruising, and all of a sudden Iran has a nuclear weapon. They would use it.”

He added that if Iran had a nuclear weapon, the Islamic Republic would “wipe out” Israel and the Middle East, and start hitting U.S. cities.

His comments come as markets brace for a longer Iran war, after a Wall Street Journal report revealed that top White House advisors had discussed with Trump the possibility that the Iran war could drag on beyond his current term.

Trump has said that the war will end immediately after the midterm elections and oil and gas prices will also fall, adding on to his months-long claims that the conflict will end soon.

In separate comments to NewsNation on Thursday, Trump denied reports that there was any damage to U.S. assets, after Iran claimed it had hit multiple U.S. fighter aircraft at a base in Jordan.

“No damage. No nothing,” Trump said, when asked if there was any truth to the reports.

Economic pressure

Washington is continuing efforts to isolate Iran from its economic network, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flagging sanctions against “a large bank” next week.

“We’re going to do it on Monday because we want to honor the memory of our fallen citizens on 9/11. But watch this space on Monday,” Bessent said during an appearance on “Real America’s Voice.”

Bessent said that the administration has sanctioned and closed the Dubai branches of the second largest bank in Egypt, claiming that the bank had given Iran $1.8 billion dollars. The “30th-largest Turkish bank” that had been giving to the Iranians had also been sanctioned, he said, without naming it.

The U.S. had sanctioned Turkey-based Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) and its subsidiaries last week.

Trump, in the NewsNation interview, was also asked how Iran could continue holding out under the current economic pressure.

“I don’t know that they’re gonna be able to hold out,” Trump said. “But it’ll get settled after the elections. Or maybe sooner. But it’ll get settled right after the election.”

Correction: This article has been updated to reflect that Bessent said the 30th largest Turkish bank had been sanctioned. An earlier version misstated the bank’s ranking.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media