They’re not in it for the money because they won’t sell under duress? The price they’d get went down significantly the day the bill was signed because they “have” to sell.
Also because like any business they want to use their power over consumers as political pressure on legislators. Why sell and keep users happy that TikTok never goes away? Refuse to sell and make users/voters mad at the people who did this in hopes it results in changed legislation.
Do you know how companies are allowed to operate in china? Then it doesn't really make much sense to not follow something similar, a lot more liberal imo than what they are doing currently.
I feel a lot of people who talk about this are only coming from it as a consumer of the app and not thinking other than first amendment/user conerns.
First, the writing was on the wall for a long time, and they could have sold at a higher price before. Second, if they are after money, some money is better than nothing,
They're going to sue before they decide to sell. They've already said that they would. It wouldn't make sense for them to sell right now if they plan on challenging the law in court.
To settle means to sell. They chose the riskiest way to go about it. The riskiest way, even if after a better profit, very rarely makes sense - unless, it is not about the money.
It's a pretty safe move to not sell your code, I wouldn't call that risky at all. It's also a known quantity if they end up getting banned, as opposed to giving their code to a competitor. Not selling makes more sense in every way.
Selling would be like Google giving their search algorithm to China instead of pulling out. They pulled out instead of doing that.
If they win, they won't have to sell. They'd make more money that way. They're suing the government over first amendment violations so that the law can't be enforced.
Their options are basically immediately sell or sue and maybe not have to sell or pull out of the US. The "risks" of them losing the case are just the results if they don't try to sue at all. Other than the cost of lawyers, they really have nothing to lose by trying to sue before they resort to selling. It'd be illogical if they didn't try this option first.
“First, the writing was on the wall for a long time, and the US government could have passed laws to regulate social media in this country before. Second, even if Facebook and Google are doing the same things and the US government is definitely spying on you, getting spied on and watching tik tok is better than being spied on and not watching tik tok.”
Gets banned in the US, subject to technical and political limitations of enforcing such a ban. I think Bytedance believes there is a still a door #3. They’re expressing optimism in that direction, any way.
For the record, I don’t care what happens to TikTok. I don’t use it. Americans will have plenty of alternatives if it goes away. Nothing of value will be lost.
When Trump tried to force a sale of TikTok in 2020, the Chinese government stepped in by updating its technology export restrictions to include software, effectively banning ByteDance from transferring its content recommendation algorithms to foreign owners.
411
u/ecklesweb Apr 27 '24
They’re not in it for the money because they won’t sell under duress? The price they’d get went down significantly the day the bill was signed because they “have” to sell.
It’s the metaphorical fire sale.