Ok, I’ve had a chance to read through the bill, so here are some notes:
(g)(3)(A) - mentions TikTok and ByteDance by name as a “foreign adversary controlled application” - so it’s absolutely a “TikTok ban”
(g)(2)(B) - exclusion for primarily review sites - not sure who this loophole is for, maybe Yelp?
(a)(1)(A) - it might be illegal for me to host and distribute a way to get access to a foreign controlled application as a private citizen, depending on the definition of “marketplace,” even if it’s just source code
(g)(1)(b) - applies to applications with 20% ownership by someone in an adversary company - I think this means Fortnite and EGS could be impacted
(g)(3)(B)(ii) - presidential powers
(d)(2) and (f) - Attorney General powers and restrictions
I think the bill is problematic, but it’s not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Powers granted to the Attorney General are pretty limited, though the President seems to have a little less restrictions.
I’m mostly concerned about collateral damage for things like FOSS, but theoretically popular forums hosted in China or Russia could be caught, though I’m guessing enforcement would be minimal.
The most troubling parts to me are:
20% ownership standard - doesn’t just apply to the CCP, but anyone in an adversary country, so I think this includes Fortnite and Epic Games generally, and probably other popular games and services funded by Chinese investors (as long as you can post something, it counts)
the President can decide that propose pretty much any piece of software as an “adversary controlled application” with only a notice given to Congress
precedent set by calling out a specific product and org (TikTok and ByteDance are mentioned by name)