We review vendors based on rigorous testing and research but also take into account your feedback and our affiliate commission with providers. Some providers are owned by our parent company.
Learn more
vpnMentor was established in 2014 to review VPN services and cover privacy-related stories. Today, our team of hundreds of cybersecurity researchers, writers, and editors continues to help readers fight for their online freedom in partnership with Kape Technologies PLC, which also owns the following products: ExpressVPN, CyberGhost, and Private Internet Access which may be ranked and reviewed on this website. The reviews published on vpnMentor are believed to be accurate as of the date of each article, and written according to our strict reviewing standards that prioritize professional and honest examination of the reviewer, taking into account the technical capabilities and qualities of the product together with its commercial value for users. The rankings and reviews we publish may also take into consideration the common ownership mentioned above, and affiliate commissions we earn for purchases through links on our website. We do not review all VPN providers and information is believed to be accurate as of the date of each article.
Advertising Disclosure

vpnMentor was established in 2014 to review VPN services and cover privacy-related stories. Today, our team of hundreds of cybersecurity researchers, writers, and editors continues to help readers fight for their online freedom in partnership with Kape Technologies PLC, which also owns the following products: ExpressVPN, CyberGhost, and Private Internet Access which may be ranked and reviewed on this website. The reviews published on vpnMentor are believed to be accurate as of the date of each article, and written according to our strict reviewing standards that prioritize professional and honest examination of the reviewer, taking into account the technical capabilities and qualities of the product together with its commercial value for users. The rankings and reviews we publish may also take into consideration the common ownership mentioned above, and affiliate commissions we earn for purchases through links on our website. We do not review all VPN providers and information is believed to be accurate as of the date of each article.

US House Votes to Force TikTok to Sell or Face Ban

US House Votes to Force TikTok to Sell or Face Ban
Hendrik Human Published on 15th March 2024 Cybersecurity Researcher

The US House of Representatives has passed a bill requiring TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, to divest the app's US assets. The House voted overwhelmingly (352-65) to pass the legislation, which gives ByteDance a six-month ultimatum to sell TikTok's US business or face a ban. The bill gained massive bipartisan support, with both parties citing the national security risks posed by Chinese-owned companies.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced the Senate would review this legislation, emphasizing the bipartisan concern about foreign influence through popular apps.

In a post on X, No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise asserted, "This is a critical national security issue. The Senate must take this up and pass it." White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed the Oval Office’s support of the bill by ordering "the Senate take swift action."

This statement aligns with the Biden administration's broader strategy to counteract China's influence in key technology sectors, including AI and telecommunications.

TikTok's CEO, Shou Zi Chew, responded by highlighting the negative impacts a ban would have on the US economy and digital creators, saying that the bill would "take billions of dollars out of the pockets of creators and small businesses."

According to Reuters, Chew also asserted the company’s intention to challenge this legislation legally. In its current form, the bill provides the company with a 165-day window to appeal the decision.

Critics of the bill, including prominent Democrats, argue for a more nuanced approach. Prominent Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez summed up many of the dissenting voices’ concerns: "There are serious antitrust and privacy questions here, and any national security concerns should be laid out to the public prior to a vote."

Others on both sides of the aisle question using “CCP-style” bans to combat perceived “CCP-style” propaganda.

As the bill moves to the Senate, the challenge for lawmakers will be drafting a version that can withstand the inevitable legal challenges in court.

About the Author

Hendrik is a writer at vpnMentor, specializing in VPN comparisons and user guides. With 5+ years of experience as a tech and cybersecurity writer, plus a background in corporate IT, he brings a variety of perspectives to test VPN services and analyze how they address the needs of different users.

Please, comment on how to improve this article. Your feedback matters!

Leave a comment

Sorry, links are not allowed in this field!

Name should contain at least 3 letters

The field content should not exceed 80 letters

Sorry, links are not allowed in this field!

Please enter a valid email address