Incoming president Donald Trump has confirmed reports that Sriram Krishnan, until recently a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), will serve as senior policy advisor for AI at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Trump said in a statement that Krishnan will “help shape and coordinate AI policy across government, working with […]

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.

The US Department of Commerce on Friday announced its awards for Samsung, Texas Instruments and Amkor Technology under the CHIPS Incentives Program, which come to more than $6.75 billion altogether. The program is meant to help expand domestic semiconductor production. Samsung was awarded up to $4.745 billion in direct funding — a smaller amount than the preliminary award of up to $6.4 billion that was announced earlier this year — while Texas Instruments was granted up to $1.61 billion and Amkor up to $407 million.

Samsung plans to invest $37 billion over the next few years to ramp up chip development and production in the US, the DOC said. The company will expand its operations in Texas to include two new production facilities and a site for research and development. It also plans to expand an existing facility in Austin. Texas Instruments is working to build three new facilities — two in Texas and one in Utah — which it’s said it will invest over $18 billion in through 2029. Amkor is planning a $2 billion investment to create an advanced packaging and test facility in Peoria, Arizona. According to Reuters, it’ll be the country’s largest facility of its kind.

The Commerce Department says the awards will be doled out as the companies complete certain project milestones. It expects the funding to support the creation of thousands of jobs per project.

On Friday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) sued four financial companies involved with Zelle. The CFPB’s lawsuit (via CNBC) accuses Zelle’s operator (Early Warning Services) and three of the service’s partner banks — JPMorgan Chase, Bank Of America and Wells Fargo — of failing to protect consumers from widespread fraud on the peer-to-peer payment system.

The CFPB says customers of those three banks have lost over $870 million during Zelle’s seven years as a payment service. The suit claims hundreds of thousands of customers who filed fraud complaints were denied meaningful assistance, with some being told to “contact the fraudsters directly to recover their money.” (Pro tip: Don’t do that.)

“The nation’s largest banks felt threatened by competing payment apps, so they rushed to put out Zelle,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra wrote in a statement. “By their failing to put in place proper safeguards, Zelle became a gold mine for fraudsters, while often leaving victims to fend for themselves.”

The CFPB says one of the system’s loopholes is that its “tokens” (linked US phone numbers or email addresses) can be used and reassigned across different banks. The agency claims fraudsters can exploit this by connecting a victim’s number or email to the perpetrator’s deposit account, causing payments meant for the consumer to go to the scammer’s account instead.

The suit accuses Zelle and the banks of allowing repeat offenders to bounce between financial institutions with impunity. “Banks did not share information about known fraudulent transactions with other banks on the network,” the CFPB wrote. “As a result, bad actors could carry out repeated fraud schemes across multiple institutions before being detected, if they were detected at all.”

The CFPB also claims the defendant banks didn’t heed red flags to prevent further fraud, report incidents consistently or on time, properly investigate customer complaints or take appropriate action.

On Friday, Zelle framed the government’s lawsuit as a political hit that would help criminals and force them to charge fees. “The CFPB’s attacks on Zelle are legally and factually flawed, and the timing of this lawsuit appears to be driven by political factors unrelated to Zelle,” Jane Khodos, Zelle spokesperson, wrote in a statement. “Zelle leads the fight against scams and fraud and has industry-leading reimbursement policies that go above and beyond the law. The CFPB’s misguided attacks will embolden criminals, cost consumers more in fees, stifle small businesses and make it harder for thousands of community banks and credit unions to compete.”

In September, JPMorgan Chase wrote in a quarterly filing (via CNBC) that it would consider counter-litigation if the CFPB took action against the bank for its role with Zelle.

Last month, The Washington Post reported that President-elect Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans plan to limit the CFPB’s funding and powers, aligning with the agendas of large financial institutions. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, his “government efficiency” advisors, have said they want to eliminate the agency, which was established in 2011 in response to the 2007-08 financial crisis and resulting recession.

Killing the agency would require a congressional vote that wouldn’t likely pass, given Republicans’ thin majorities. But they could do what Trump did in his first term: appoint a new director to slow or stop regulatory actions, effectively kneecapping the agency as long as they’re in charge.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) spending bill has just been release and it grants DJI a year's grace before it's potentially banned in the US, The Verge reported. It was expected that DJI and rival Autel could be banned by the end of 2024 because of the Countering CCP Drones Act provision. However, the bill gives DJI an extra year to prove to an "appropriate national security agency" that its products don't pose a national security risk in the US. 

Failing that, the bill authorizes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to place DJI's drones on its covered list for 2026, meaning retailers would no longer be able to import them. It also means that the products (including drones and cameras like the Osmo Pocket 3) would be prohibited from connecting to US networks, and their internal radios would no longer be authorized by the FCC. That would technically prohibit the use of DJI products already owned by consumers, though the US wouldn't likely stop consumers from doing so. 

In a reply on its Viewpoints blog, DJI said it's "good news" that the ban wasn't included in this year's budget. However, it pointed out that "drones manufactured in China are singled out for scrutiny and the legislation does not designate a specific agency to undertake the required study." The latter point could cause the company harm "simply because no agency chose to take on the work of studying our product," it wrote.

The main reason DJI is still alive is through the support of drone enthusiasts and content creators, along with law enforcement and search and rescue organizations. "In the event that a bill like this would go fully through and would potentially ban the use of Chinese drones for public safety, it'd be catastrophic for the public safety drone industry," said Law Enforcement Drone Association spokesperson Brendan Karr in a letter to Congress. 

However, US representatives believe they're a risk. "DJI drones pose the national security threat of TikTok, but with wings. This Chinese-controlled company cannot be allowed to continue to operate in the US," said Republican Representative Elise Stefanik. "These Chinese-manufactured drones allow for the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, to access data in a backdoor manner and ultimately surveil Americans," added Democratic Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved California’s plan to phase out and ban the sale of new gas-powered cars and light trucks by 2035. ABC News reported the EPA gave California the waivers it needed to enact the Advanced Clean Cars II Regulations (ACC II) devised and approved by the California Air Resources Board in 2022.

The EPA also approved California’s plan to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from heavy-duty vehicles in order to reduce the amount of smog in the air. The state will require an initial 75 percent reduction in NOx pollution followed by a 90 percent reduction a few years later.

The ACC II provides a year-to-year blueprint for phasing out the selling of combustion-engine vehicles. The plan sets a 2026 deadline by which 35 percent of the state’s car sales must be electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids or models with hydrogen fuel cells. Then by 2030, the electric vehicle sale threshold rises to 68 percent before reaching its ultimate 100 percent sale requirement by 2035. Consumers and dealerships will still be able to buy, sell and drive used ICE and hybrid cards until the ACC II. California Air Resources Board chair Liane Randolph estimated the ACC II could lead to a 50 percent drop in pollution by 2040.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom hailed the decision and ACC II in a statement as evidence that “California can rise to the challenge of protecting our people by cleaning our air and cutting pollution.”

The pornographic website PornHub is adding Florida to its list of states to block starting next year. Gizmodo reported that Floridians who visited the porn website recently were greeted with a warning that says “You will lose access to PornHub in 14 days” thanks to a new state law that requires an ID to visit the website.

PornHub has already blocked a number of states from accessing its wealth of sexually explicit content because of new state laws that require visitors to provide a valid government ID to verify their age for access. Florida’s legislature passed its porn ID law and Gov. Ron DeSantis signed it into law on March 25 as part of a series of regulations intended to protect minors from explicit materials. The adult entertainment trade association The Free Speech Coalition is fighting Florida’s law in federal court, according to The Florida Times-Union.

Florida will become the 13th state to institute an age verification law for adult websites. Florida follows Texas, Utah, Arkansas, Virginia, Montana, North Carolina, Mississippi, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky and Nebraska that all have ID verification laws on its books.

“Not only does this impinge on the rights of adults to access protected speech, it fails strict scrutiny by employing the least effective and yet also most restrictive means of accomplishing [the state’s] stated purpose of allegedly protecting minors,” according to the official PornHub blog

The PornHub blog also states that the company is concerned about the safety and welfare of children but the idea of using identification creates more risks with users’ safety and privacy. The Louisiana law in particular has no state regulator overseeing the new laws’ implementation “which results in a flawed enforcement regime,” the PornHub blog states.

The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear TikTok owner ByteDance’s appeal of a law that could ban the app. The court took up the case (via NBC News) unusually quickly — only two days after the company filed its appeal. Oral arguments are scheduled for January 10.

The law being challenged, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, is set to go into effect on January 19, the day before President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration. The court didn’t provisionally block the law when saying it would take up the case.

The bill mandates that the app be banned if ByteDance doesn’t sell the platform to an American company. It was passed with overwhelming support in Congress and signed by President Biden in April. The argument was that TikTok had become a national security issue.

The Justice Department defended the law in lower courts, citing concerns that the Chinese government could influence the company and collect data about American citizens. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the legislation earlier this month.

ByteDance has claimed the law violates free speech rights, a position the ACLU has supported. Trump tried to ban TikTok during his first term but changed his tune during the 2024 Presidential campaign.

According to the Wall Street Journal, various US authorities are investigating TP-Link’s routers, linking them to China-backed cyberattacks. The Commerce, Justice and Defense departments each have their own investigations, and sources told the Journal the Commerce Department has subpoenaed TP-Link. These investigations may contribute to a potential ban on these routers next year.

In September, the Journal reported on a wave of Chinese cyberattacks in the US that involved many TP-Link routers. The attackers targeted government organizations and Defense Department suppliers, as well as non-government organizations and think tanks.

TP-Link currently holds about 65 percent of the US router market for small businesses and homes. They're also widely used by the Department of Defense and NASA. But sources told the Journal the devices often ship with security flaws, and that the company fails to address these issues or engage with the security community.

“We welcome any opportunities to engage with the U.S. government to demonstrate that our security practices are fully in line with industry security standards, and to demonstrate our ongoing commitment to the U.S. market, U.S. consumers, and addressing U.S. national security risks,” a TP-Link spokesperson told WSJ.

If TP-Link routers are banned, it would be the biggest Chinese telecom equipment extraction in the US since the 2019 Huawei ban.

• In his new book, Palantir CEO Alex Karp will explore how "Silicon Valley has lost its way."
• Big Tech needs to realign with the US government to address pressing issues like AI, he says.
• Karp says the progressive left has impeded this work in recent years.

Palantir CEO Alex Karp said Silicon Valley has lost its way under the spell of the progressive left — and has spent its time on inconsequential things like social media instead of collaborating with the US government on game-changing advancements.

It's time for that to change, Karp will argue in his coming book, "The Technological Republic." He sat down in an interview this week to unpack his thoughts on the incoming Trump administration — and what needs to change in Big Tech.

Speaking with investor Stanley Druckenmiller to promote the book, Karp recounted how, in 2018, Google employees protested the tech giant's involvement with Project Maven, which was a collaboration with the Department of Defense.

Amid outcry, Google opted not to renew its contract. (Palantir is among the companies now working on the project.)

It's become unpopular in some quarters of the tech world for companies to support the US government in recent years, Karp contended. But a shift may be afoot, he said.

"The Valley has realized you just cannot placate the anti-intellectual left" — a trend that's accelerated in the wake of October 7, he said. "They'll destroy your business."

Karp's book will argue that the tech sector must work with the government to address pressing issues — namely, prevailing in the AI arms race.

At the same time, Karp expressed optimism about "the level of talent that is coming in to fix our government," nodding to the incoming Trump administration.

He said American society is at a crisis point, with many feeling certain "instruments of measurement" — schools, borders, and intergovernmental government organizations like the United Nations — "have been corroded." On the other side of the aisle, Karp said, people are "worn out."

Palantir did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

In the interview, Karp joked that Palantir was "a rare cult with no sex and very little drugs — and we're not poisoning anyone."

Elon Musk and SpaceX are under three federal reviews from three different US military departments for allegedly failing to comply with reporting protocols. The New York Times reported that Musk and his private aerospace company have repeatedly disregarded requirements to disclose trips and meetings with foreign leaders including Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The three reviews of Musk and SpaceX’s suspected activity were opened by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General, the Air Force and the Pentagon’s Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. The Air Force also reportedly denied Musk’s request for high-level security access because of concerns over potential security risks if he were allowed to handle certain pieces of classified information.

Some SpaceX workers with knowledge of the reviews expressed their concerns to the Times about Musk’s ability to handle sensitive data when he posts openly about meetings on his X account. He already has top-security clearance at SpaceX that allows him to view certain pieces of classified material such as information on the US’ advanced military technology. Musk is required to disclose certain details about his personal life and travel habits to the Defense Department but some employees allege that he and his company have failed to meet those requirements as far back as 2021.

Sources also told the newspaper that Musk allegedly failed to provide department officials with his full itinerary including meetings with foreign leaders. He also may not have provided reports on his personal and prescription drug use as part of his vetting procedure even though he smoked marijuana with Joe Rogan on his The Joe Rogan Experience podcast and talked about microdosing ketamine on his X page. and with former CNN anchor Don Lemon.

America isn’t the only country concerned about Musk’s ability to keep a lid on classified information. Nine other countries “including in Europe and the Middle East,” raised security concerns about Musk sitting in meetings with US defense officers over the past three years, according to The New York Times. Employees who were concerned about the lax reactions to these vetting requirements failed to report the behavior out of fear of losing their jobs.

After a federal court last week denied TikTok’s request to delay a law that could ban the app in the United States, the company is now turning to the Supreme Court in an effort to buy time. The social media company has asked the court to temporarily block the law, currently set to take effect January 19, 2025, it said in a brief statement.

“The Supreme Court has an established record of upholding Americans’ right to free speech,” TikTok wrote in a post on X. “Today, we are asking the Court to do what it has traditionally done in free speech cases: apply the most rigorous scrutiny to speech bans and conclude that it violates the First Amendment.”

The company, which has argued that the law is unconstitutional, lost its initial legal challenge of the law earlier this month. The company then requested a delay of the law’s implementation, saying that President-elect Donal Trump had said he would “save” TikTok. That request was denied on Friday.

In its filing with the Supreme Court, TikTok again referenced Trump's comments. "It would not be in the interest of anyone—not the parties, the public, or the courts—for the Act’s ban on TikTok to take effect only for the new Administration to halt its enforcement hours, days, or even weeks later," it wrote. Trump's inauguration is one day after a ban of the app would take effect. 

TikTok is now hoping the Supreme Court will intervene to suspend the law in order to give the company time to make its final legal appeal. Otherwise, app stores and Internet service providers will be forced to begin blocking TikTok next month, making the app inaccessible to its 170 million US users.

Update December 16, 2024, 1:30 PM PT: Updated with details from TikTok's court filing. 

In perhaps the least surprising news of the past six weeks, President-elect Donald Trump reportedly plans to roll back President Biden’s electric vehicle and emissions policies. Reuters reports that the incoming president’s transition team has recommended cutting off support for EVs and charging stations while boosting measures to block cars, components and battery materials from China.

The transition team’s other reported plans include new tariffs on all battery materials globally, boosting US production of battery materials and negotiations with allies for exemptions. They’re also said to plan on taking money allocated for building charging stations and making EVs more affordable and redirecting them to sourcing batteries and their required minerals from places other than China. In addition, they reportedly want to axe the Biden administration’s $7,500 tax credit for consumer EV purchases.

The plans would let automakers produce more gas-powered vehicles by reversing emissions and fuel economy standards, pushing them back to 2019 levels. Reuters says that would lead to around 25 percent more emissions per vehicle mile than the current limits. It would also lower the average car fuel economy by about 15 percent.

Climate scientists have stressed the importance of transitioning from gas-powered cars to EVs in reducing carbon emissions and fending off the most ravaging scenarios for the planet. Greenhouse gases, including those from vehicle emissions, build up in the atmosphere and warm the climate. That leads to a cascade of effects in the atmosphere, on land and in oceans — some of which we’re already seeing.

As for tariffs, economists have said Trump’s plans would likely spur multiple trade wars as countries retaliate with tariffs on American goods, disrupt supply chains and pierce the heart of America’s post-World War II alliances. “If we go down the tariff war path, we’re going down a very dark path for the economy,” Mark Zandi, the chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, told The New York Times in October.

The Biden administration has championed climate legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act, which allocated $369 billion for green initiatives, and EPA rules that require automakers to ramp up EV sales.

Meanwhile, Trump has called climate change a “hoax.” In May, he reportedly told a group of oil executives that he would immediately reverse dozens of Biden’s environmental rules while blocking new ones from being enacted. His asking price for such deregulation was that they raise $1 billion for his campaign. (Thanks, Citizens United!) So, while the reports about his transition team’s plans are still a gut punch to those who care about leaving the planet in a habitable state for future generations (and slowing the effects we’re already seeing), they aren’t exactly shocking to anyone paying attention.

Meta sent a letter to California’s attorney general on Thursday urging him to stop OpenAI from converting to a for-profit company, a move that Meta says would be “wrong” and “could lead to a proliferation of similar start-up ventures that are notionally charitable until they are potentially profitable.” The letter from Meta Platforms to Attorney General Rob Bonta, first reported on by The Wall Street Journal, comes on the heels of an injunction filed by Elon Musk at the end of November that also asked for OpenAI's conversion to be blocked.

Meta argues in its letter, which The Verge has published in full, that OpenAI was able to raise billions of dollars from investors under its original nonprofit mission and now “wants to change its status while retaining all of the benefits that enabled it to reach the point it has today.” It goes on to say, “OpenAI should not be allowed to flout the law by taking and reappropriating assets it built as a charity and using them for potentially enormous private gains.” The letter also calls upon the attorney general to look into OpenAI’s past practices as a nonprofit. Engadget has reached out to OpenAI for comment.

Meta’s letter also voices support for Elon Musk and Shivon Zilis to represent public interests in Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI, which was revived in August. On Friday, OpenAI published a timeline citing emails and other communications from Elon Musk to show how he previously pushed for OpenAI to become a for-profit with him at the helm. 

In a statement shared with The Verge in response to Meta's letter, OpenAI board chair Bret Taylor said, “While our work remains ongoing as we continue to consult independent financial and legal advisors, any potential restructuring would ensure the nonprofit continues to exist and thrive, and receives full value for its current stake in the OpenAI for-profit with an enhanced ability to pursue its mission.”

A federal court has denied TikTok’s request for a temporary pause of a law that could result in a ban of the app next month. The ruling, which came in response to an emergency injunction filed by TikTok earlier this week, is the latest legal setback for the company as it tries to avoid a total ban of its app in the United States.

In its request for a delay in the law taking effect, TikTok indicated that it planned to appeal to the Supreme Court. The company’s lawyers also cited the possibility that President-elect Donald Trump may want to take a different approach given some of Trump’s past comments about the app. But in a brief order, a panel of three judges denied that request, writing that such a pause was “unwarranted.”

TikTok’s future now depends on the Supreme Court, though there’s no guarantee the court will agree to hear the case. "As we have previously stated, we plan on taking this case to the Supreme Court, which has an established historical record of protecting Americans' right to free speech,” the company said in a statement. “The voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world will be silenced on January 19th, 2025 unless the TikTok ban is halted."

The United States Postal Service unveiled a plan to buy a fleet of all-electric mail trucks for its mail carriers back in 2022, of which 3,000 were supposed to be delivered by now. Unfortunately, those plans aren’t even close to fruition. The Washington Post reported that defense contractor Oshkosh has only delivered 93 vehicles so far.

In 2022, The Postal Service announced its plan to buy at least 60,000 “Next Generation Delivery Vehicles” (NGDV) for its mail carriers by 2028 and start replacing its aging fleet of trucks. The Postal Service’s initial order called for 5,000 all-electric vehicles along with new, gas-powered vehicles, but calls from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Biden Administration pushed them to increase the share of NGDVs that would run on electricity.

The Washington Post obtained nearly 21,000 government and internal company records and spoke with 20 people familiar with the trucks’ manufacturing and design process. Its reporting shows that Oshkosh ran into significant manufacturing delays of the electric NGDVs that caused lower than expected delivery numbers. Some of the anonymous sources said that engineers struggled to calibrate the mail trucks’ airbags, and the vehicles’ body and internal components are unable to contain water leaks to an alarming degree.

The turnaround time for building these new mail trucks is also very slow. The Post reports that the South Carolina factory can only build one truck per day even though Oshkosh hoped it could build at least 80 vehicles a day by now.

Oshkosh also failed to inform the Postal Service about these delays. Four of the background sources say a senior company executive tried to update the Postal Service about these manufacturing issues only to have those efforts blocked by their corporate superiors.

An Oshkosh spokesperson said in a statement that the defense contractor is still “fully committed to being a strong and reliable partner” with the Postal Services and insists “we remain on track to meet all delivery deadlines,” according to The Post.

The failure of these plans doesn’t just affect the Postal Service’s ability to modernize and update its fleet of aging mail trucks. It could also throw a wrench into President Biden’s plans to combat climate change. Reuters reported on Friday that President Donald Trump’s transition team is considering cancelling the electric mail truck program altogether.

Donald Trump has named current commissioner Andrew Ferguson as the new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) chair, the president-elect posted on Truth Social. Ferguson has previously decried what he called censorship by big tech and worked as an antitrust enforcer for the FTC and Department of Justice. 

"At the FTC, we will end Big Tech’s vendetta against competition and free speech," Ferguson wrote on X. "We will make sure that America is the world’s technological leader and the best place for innovators to bring new ideas to life."

Ferguson will take over from Linda Khan, who drew the ire of big tech by launching antitrust cases against Apple and Google, while also blocking a number of multi-billion-dollar corporate mergers. Under her hand, the FTC has gone after large companies of all stripes over concerns that large mergers would undermine competition and harm consumers with higher prices. 

Ferguson's pitch for the job reportedly included plans to "reverse Lina Khan's anti-business agenda" and "hold big tech accountable and stop censorship," according to Punchbowl News. However, he stated that the agency should continue its strong scrutiny of the dominance of large tech firms, according to The New York Times' sources. 

With Khan leaving her post as FTC chair, Trump also appointed Mark Meador as commissioner, which will result in a Republican majority on the five-person commission. Trump previously named commission member Brendan Carr as FCC chairman. 

A new report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) secretly obtained the phone call and text message records of 43 congressional staffers, two members of Congress in 2017 and 2018 and members of the news media. DOJ prosecutors obtained call and text logs from telecommunications companies and third-party providers including Apple through subpoenas, search warrants and court orders.

It’s already known that President Trump’s DOJ tried to obtain communication records from Apple as part of an investigation into press leaks about stories that Trump associates made contact with Russian officials. The New York Times reported in 2021 that one of the subpoenas filed in 2018 demanded to see the accounts of 109 identifiers including Democratic Representatives Adam B. Schiff and Eric Swalwell of California, congressional aides and family members including one who was a minor. Now it appears that the scope of those subpoenas was much larger.

The IG’s report says prosecutors attached gag orders to the subpoenas to prevent Apple and other companies from notifying their customers about the information orders. Most of the non-disclosure agreements were extended at least once, some of which stretched up to four years. The communication logs only showed the names of the parties involved in the calls and text messages.

Even though the OIG’s report found no political motivation for prosecutors’ requests, he noted the subpoenas and other legal means of obtaining communication logs “risks chilling Congress’s ability to conduct oversight of the executive branch.” The report also says the DOH failed to convene the News Media Review Committee, a Justice Department advisory committee formed as part of an overhaul of its news media policies in 2014, to review its information requests calling its actions “troubling,” according to the report.

Apple also took steps to limit the scope of legal requests following news of the subpoenas filed on Reps. Schiff and Swalwell. The tech company placed a limit of 25 identifiers per legal request on customers’ communication information in 2021.

The U.S. sanctioned a Chinese cybersecurity company and one of its employees for exploiting a zero-day vulnerability in Sophos firewalls to target U.S. organizations. On Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury Department said Guan Tianfeng, an employee of Sichuan Silence, used the vulnerability to compromise approximately 81,000 firewalls in April 2020. The hacking campaign, detailed by Sophos […]

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.

TikTok is beginning its last-ditch legal challenge to avoid a ban in the United States. The company filed an emergency injunction in federal court Monday, asking for a delay in the law that would ban the app from taking effect so it could have time to mount a Supreme Court challenge.

The new court filing comes just three days after the company lost its initial court challenge to the law, currently set to take effect January 19, 2025, that requires app stores and internet providers to block TikTok if ByteDance doesn’t sell the app. In their ruling, a panel of three appeals court judges wrote that the US government had “persuasive national security justifications that apply specifically to the platform that TikTok operates.”

TikTok has argued the law is unconstitutional and that it would unjustly hurt creators and businesses that rely on its service. “Estimates show that small businesses on TikTok would lose more than $1 billion in revenue and creators would suffer almost $300 million in lost earnings in just one month unless the TikTok Ban is halted,” TikTok said in a statement Monday.

In its latest filing, TikTok notes that President-elect Donald Trump has promised to “save” the app and that temporarily halting the law would allow “the incoming Administration to evaluate this matter.” Right now, the law is slated to take effect the day before Trump’s inauguration.

The company requested a decision by December 16. Even if the injunction isn’t granted, it’s still not quite the end of the line for the company’s legal challenges. If the Supreme Court ends up taking on the case, TikTok would have another opportunity to try to get the law overturned.

Senators Richard Blumenthal and Marsha Blackburn announced on Saturday that they’ve made changes to the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) with help from X to “strengthen the bill while safeguarding free speech online and ensuring it is not used to stifle expression.” The Senate passed the bill in July with a vote of 91-3, but it’s since stalled in the House, and its proponents are pushing for it to be passed before the end of the year. X’s CEO Linda Yaccarino also posted about the collaboration, and called for Congress and the House to pass the bill.

“After working with the bill authors, I’m proud to share that we’ve made progress to further protect freedom of speech while maintaining safety for minors online,” Yaccarino wrote in a post on X that was shared by the two senators. KOSA is meant to protect minors from “addictive” social media features and potentially dangerous content by placing a “duty of care” on the companies that own the platforms. But critics have argued that it could lead to censorship and other harms. The new changes, according to The Verge, clarify the conditions under which duty of care can be enforced and narrow its application around anxiety and depressive disorders, stating they must be “objectively verifiable” and tied to “compulsive usage.”

In their joint statement, Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) and Blackburn (R-Tennessee) said:

These changes should eliminate once and for all the false narrative that this bill would be weaponized by unelected bureaucrats to censor Americans. We thank Elon and Linda for their bold leadership and commitment to protecting children online and for helping us get this bill across the finish line this Congress. We appreciate that this endorsement and revised text reflects their publicly stated goal of furthering free speech without fear of censorship. We reiterate X’s call to pass KOSA by the end of the year — it is clear that this legislation has overwhelming support from Congress.

KOSA was first introduced in February 2022 and has faced opposition from groups including the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. It’s been revised multiple times.