And that’s all it should be. Currently, the US government does not have the facilities to block traffic to specific websites or IP addresses on a country-wide basis. We don’t have a “great firewall” the way China does, and we should keep it that way.
Yes it does? All it would take is a single piece of legislation and a couple of hours for all ISPs to block all traffic to certain IP ranges.
Sure, it doesn’t prevent VPNs but it would block 95% of access. The remaining 5% can be blocked through banning VPNs and deep packet inspection, the latter of which doesn’t require that much new infrastructure.
They cannot take down a domain registered with a registry and registrar outside their jurisdiction. They could try and compel domestic DNS providers to block queries for that domain, but there are numerous providers who are unlikely to comply with that request on grounds of the 1st amendment.
Given that the OP is about TikTok (a foreign website) being blocked in the United States, your point has limited relevance here. Further, if the website was hosted stateside they could just physically seize the servers themselves.
Correct, but that doesn’t mean TikTok would be inaccessible if they didn’t have servers in the US. My point is that the federal government doesn’t have the ability to completely limit access to a foreign website. It would be very slow and they’d lose users, sure, but they could keep running as usual from outside the US and still remain accessible to people inside the US.
Essentially yea, the laws enforcement mechanism as-is is just having the app delisted from app stores
Everything else is of TikToks own doing
And that’s all it should be. Currently, the US government does not have the facilities to block traffic to specific websites or IP addresses on a country-wide basis. We don’t have a “great firewall” the way China does, and we should keep it that way.
Yes it does? All it would take is a single piece of legislation and a couple of hours for all ISPs to block all traffic to certain IP ranges.
Sure, it doesn’t prevent VPNs but it would block 95% of access. The remaining 5% can be blocked through banning VPNs and deep packet inspection, the latter of which doesn’t require that much new infrastructure.
Idk why you are downvoted. They have that yes
False, feds have taken down whole domains for violations
They cannot take down a domain registered with a registry and registrar outside their jurisdiction. They could try and compel domestic DNS providers to block queries for that domain, but there are numerous providers who are unlikely to comply with that request on grounds of the 1st amendment.
Given that the OP is about TikTok (a foreign website) being blocked in the United States, your point has limited relevance here. Further, if the website was hosted stateside they could just physically seize the servers themselves.
They have servers here otherwise it would be a laggy mess to use tiktok
Correct, but that doesn’t mean TikTok would be inaccessible if they didn’t have servers in the US. My point is that the federal government doesn’t have the ability to completely limit access to a foreign website. It would be very slow and they’d lose users, sure, but they could keep running as usual from outside the US and still remain accessible to people inside the US.