The bill allows the Secretary of Commerce to unilaterally ban products associated with countries of their choosing, with a 20 year prison sentence for any US citizen who attempts to use a VPN to circumvent the access ban.
That's fucked up and insane. It should also fail a First Amendment test easily, but that all depends on the courts
My wife and I use WeChat because her family lives in China and we want to be able to chat and do video calls with her. If Secretary of Commerce declares that WeChat is illegal that is going to put an enormous strain on my family.
But, except for maybe some of those in the French Revolution, those are mostly foot soldiers, or leaders who fell victim to distinct subsequent revolutions, not the people who kicked off the resolution getting eaten by it.
That's who I was referring to in GGP. Generally the masses don't fare well in revolution.
specifically, hardware what sold to >=1MM consumers, or software product >=1MM AAU.
Seems reasonable.
Its not “are owned by”, its “has a current, pending, or potential future controlling interest, direct or indirect, that is, will be, or will come to have been held by an adversary of the united states” (and, yes, the bill itself explicitly and separately refers to both simple future and future perfect, for some reason.)
No, it is not only restricted to services that are owned by adversaries of the United States. The text of the bill is very clear and much broader.
(A) owns, controls, or manages information and communications technology products or services; and
(B) (i) has not less than 1,000,000 United States-based annual active users at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered holding is referred to the President; or
(ii) for which more than 1,000,000 units have been sold to persons in the United States before the date on which the covered holding is referred to the President.