Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks

TikTok Pushes Users To Lemon8 As Ban Looms (axios.com) 61

Posted by BeauHD from the backup-apps dept.
TikTok has been pushing the platform's sister app, Lemon8, encouraging users to migrate via sponsored posts amid a looming ban. Axios reports: In the last few weeks, Lemon8 has been promoting its app to TikTok users through sponsored TikTok videos. In one sponsored post, TikTok user @miller.dailylife shares a video with a creator saying, "TikTok actually has another backup app. It's called Lemon8 ... and it automatically signs you in with your TikTok so you can still keep the same TikTok name and things like that. And it's supposed to transfer your followers over. ... Once you add Lemon8, it automatically pops up on your TikTok bio, so that people can just click on it. So, just so you guys know, now that they're trying to do this ban, if you want to have somewhere else to go where the government is not 100% controlling what we see, what we consume ... Just go ahead and go on to Lemon8."

In November, TikTok began informing users of its sister app, Lemon8, that beginning late that month Lemon8 would be powered by TikTok, and their TikTok usernames would also be used on Lemon8. "Some of your data on TikTok will be used to power services on lemon8," the notice says. "Your Lemon8 profile link will be shown to your TikTok profile publicly by default," it continues. "You can choose not to show it by editing your TikTok profile." Last March, Lemon8 jumped into the U.S. App Store's Top 10 list shortly after it launched in the U.S. It currently ranks as one of the top-ranking free apps on Apple's app store.

The report notes that the TikTok ban law also applies to other apps owned by TikTok's Chinese parent ByteDance, like Lemon8. "ByteDance could be betting that regulators and app store companies are so focused on TikTok that they won't pay attention to its other apps," says Axios.

TikTok Pushes Users To Lemon8 As Ban Looms More | Reply

TikTok Pushes Users To Lemon8 As Ban Looms

Comments Filter:

  • This will go well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Local ID10T ( 790134 ) <ID10T.L.USER@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @07:12PM (#65074019) Homepage

    "But...but... it is a different subsidiary!"

    Never try to rules-lawyer a judge.

    If they agree with you, you don't need to make up complicated work-arounds for the orders as the ruling will be in your favor. If they don't agree, they will slap you with contempt charges.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

      The ring has already been kissed. It's not going anywhere. https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/16... [cnn.com]

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You could just buy your judges like Mango Mussolini and his oligarchs.

    • Re:This will go well (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @08:18PM (#65074189) Homepage Journal

      Maybe they're trying to buy some time procedurally until Trump's DoJ or Kevin O'Leary or SCOTUS can do something for them.

      It's weird days when Dems are trying to shut down speech and go against China and the R's are backing China and courting the youth vote.

      The 2008 demographic paradigm is totally reversed now.

      • Re:This will go well (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @11:26PM (#65074419)

        The type of speech being controlled matters. If you believe this is an effort to block a foreign agitprop or intelligence-gathering outlet, it's a good thing. If you believe it's an underhanded way of controlling the market for American business... Well, still a good thing if you're an American / America First kind of person?

        Either way it makes sense for a government to act this way on behalf of its citizens. The fact that Trump might be a lifeline for a Chinese interest should make you ask some questions about who benefits. I'd be kind of impressed if you could keep a straight face while stating Trump would do it to be fair.

        • Don't feed the troll.

          The type of speech being controlled matters. If you believe this is an effort to block a foreign agitprop or intelligence-gathering outlet, it's a good thing. If you believe it's an underhanded way of controlling the market for American business... Well, still a good thing if you're an American / America First kind of person?

          You present two wildly different motivations for the ban and declare both "good" regardless of the outcome. This isn’t analysis—it’s bait. You’re attempting to provoke reactions from people who see the ban as either justified or a cynical economic ploy. By refusing to take a clear position, you derail any meaningful discussion.

          The fact that Trump might be a lifeline for a Chinese interest should make you ask some questions about who benefits.

          Here, you imply ulterior motives without evidence, inviting conspiracy theorists to join the fray. You are muddying the waters with insinu

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The Republicans will do anything to win. That's all. If it means working with China now, that's what they will do.

        • >"The Republicans will do anything to win."

          The other half believes the Democrats will do anything to win. It is quite possible both halves are correct.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            The Democrats won't do what they must to win. They did nothing about SCOTUS, or women's rights. Nothing like the gerrymandering that the R's get up to.

            • The Democrats won't do what they must to win. They did nothing about SCOTUS, or women's rights. Nothing like the gerrymandering that the R's get up to.

              The only time gerrymandering is complained about is when the other side does it better, and if you don't think Democrats haven't done it you are insane. Not defending the practice (and trust me, Dems did racial gerrymandering in the past to try to get more seats) but unless someone puts out a real solution to the issue it is something that will change based on the winds of politics.

          • If the Democrats were willing to do anything to win, they'd have riled up their supporters into storming the capitol to 'stop the steal'.

    • Never try to rules-lawyer a judge.

      No one is doing this. It wasn't a court order, it was legislation. Legislation by definition is rules-lawyering. If the legislation calls out Tiktok specifically rather than any service bytedance offers, then tough shit, they should write better legislation next time.

      Laws literally are ruled on around edge cases. Whether Lemon8 is legal or not is up to a judge to decide, and judges often rule on the matter and text of a law rather than the implicit intent. You may have heard the term "loophole" before.

      • The law didn't leave this loophole open. This service will either be e-Lemon8ed or it will be sold off at a huge profit at the last minute while maintaining the TikTok brand for the rest of the world.

    • It would be unquestionably unconstitutional for Congress to ban TikTok by name, so simply changing their name wouldn't matter anyway. But the law must have some criteria that TikTok meets, and they're thinking that the new service doesn't meet at least one of those criteria (my guess would be number of users or named owner).

      • It would be unquestionably unconstitutional for Congress to ban TikTok by name

        That may be true, but that certainly doesn't mean it never happens. That's one of the main reasons the Supreme Court exists. In this particular case, I have no idea how the law was written, so I don't know if it applies. But I wouldn't be surprised if it did mention TikTok by name because the law has never mattered less in this country for people who have money or power. A few "gratuities" to some SC judges and the outcome is

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mysidia ( 191772 )

          The law DOES call out TikTok by name, however, and defines it as unlawful.

          It not only prohibits App stores from continuing to distribute or update the app; It also prohibits Hosting providers from Offering them any Web hosting or DNS hosting services on servers To allow Access by any users within the maritime borders of the United States.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by unrtst ( 777550 )

        It would be unquestionably unconstitutional for Congress to ban TikTok by name ...

        You sure about that? Here's the bill ("H.R. 7521 (EH) - Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act"):
        https://www.govinfo.gov/conten... [govinfo.gov]

        Here's some extracts from it:

        ... such as TikTok and any successor application or service and any other application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Ltd. or an entity under the control of ByteDance Ltd.

        And this:

        (3) Foreign adversary controlled application. ...
        (A) any of--
        (i) ByteDance, Ltd.;
        (ii) TikTok;
        (iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that is controlled by a foreign adversary; or
        (iv) an entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by an entity identified in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or
        (B) ...

        There's a lot more specific naming than I feel there should be, but it's there nonetheless. There are also clauses to allow this definition to be expanded, but they require designation of such by the President. However, there is no definition that may automatically designate any other entities as such without

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by mysidia ( 191772 )

        The law calls out all "Foreign adversary controlled applications", and specifically defines that to include Any service related to TikTok or ByteDance.

        It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:

        (A) Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled a

      • It would be unquestionably unconstitutional for Congress to ban TikTok by name, so simply changing their name wouldn't matter anyway. But the law must have some criteria that TikTok meets, and they're thinking that the new service doesn't meet at least one of those criteria (my guess would be number of users or named owner).

        Congress gets its authority to regulate commerce from the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3), which lets it oversee trade with foreign nations, and its powers to address national security threats under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18). It’s pretty clear Congress is well within its rights here. To your point -- this isn’t about banning TikTok by name. The criteria that this ban invokes are sovereignty and national security, and nothing else. Chan

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mysidia ( 191772 )

      I believe reason they can't be found in contempt is there is No court order for TikTok to cease operating in the first place.

      It's a law. Generally speaking they would have to fail to abide by the law and then be sued by the DOJ, and the DOJ would have to seek that court order directing TikTok to do something.

      Also even if they ignore the order it's a bit difficult to find the director of ByteDance personally in contempt If that person does not reside within the US, and is outside the jurisdiction of the

  • Please oh please (Score:5, Funny)

    by dohzer ( 867770 ) on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @07:35PM (#65074111)

    I hope the US Supreme Court eLemon8s this company too.

    • Why would the supreme court do this? It didn't do it to TikTok, the legislative branch did. All the Supreme Court did was uphold the law as not a free speech impingement. Now if that law is so very specific for TikTok then Lemon8 will need a whole new law written for it or the Supreme Court has no basis to make a ruling against it.

  • Presumably the ban will be pushed to <StupidName2> too?

    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by easyTree ( 1042254 )

      In retrospect, SchmikMok should pivot to stupid-names-as-a-service.

      • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

        by easyTree ( 1042254 )

        Or turning-your-loved-ones-into-retards-who-lose-focus-contests-to-goldfish-AS-A-SERVICE. Oh wait, that's what they do already; my bad.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Creating a new company is the new META.

    • Will it though? That will require a change in legislation, most critically from a completely different government now in charge.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by unrtst ( 777550 )

        It won't require changing the legislation, but the President would need to make a public notice proposing the determination of the alternative company as a significant threat to national security (that's assuming Lemon8 isn't a direct subsidiary of ByteDance and automatically included).

        IMO, I think this is to buy some time to see what the trump administration does with things. Providers may be forced to turn off TikTok stuff the day off inauguration but, even if Lemon8 is a subsidiary, it would still buy th

    • Well since, "The report notes that the TikTok ban law also applies to other apps owned by TikTok's Chinese parent ByteDance, like Lemon8.", yes.

      • This seems to render the redirection to <StupidName2> a waste of effort.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by unrtst ( 777550 )

          This seems to render the redirection to <StupidName2> a waste of effort.

          The TikTok ban goes into effect Jan. 19.
          President-elect trump gets sworn in Jan 20.

          trump had asked the Supreme Court to pause implementation of said law (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-urges-supreme-court-hit-pause-law-ban-tiktok-us-month-rcna185606), arguing that he "alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise ...". IMO, it's blatantly obvious what the Lemon8 move is for - it buys just enough time at minimal cost.

  • In layman's terms...

    - TikTok is Instagram Reels

    - Lemon8 is more like Instagram itself

    Lemon8 is not at all like TikTok - it is not video-centric, it encourages written posts and photo posts. You can't doom-scroll through videos on Lemon8.

    Also of note... Lemon8 is only available in 8 countries - US, UK, Japan, and a handful of others. It is unclear why that is.

    • In layman's terms...

      - TikTok is Instagram Reels

      - Lemon8 is more like Instagram itself

      Lemon8 is not at all like TikTok - it is not video-centric, it encourages written posts and photo posts. You can't doom-scroll through videos on Lemon8.

      I know nothing about Lemon8 but Instagram definitely supports endless doomscrolling. I just opened the app and when I scroll down I'm get a stream of shortform videos. I suppose there's occasionally a still photo in there, but I believe that's supported on TikTok too?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by brunes69 ( 86786 )

        What I mean is it isn't going to serve you videos. It is just going to scroll through posts/pictures.

        The UX is more like Pinterest than Instagram, even though the posts have text with them as well.

        • I don't think the way the content is presented is the issue at hand though. It's the fact that that this is a Chinese company that controls the algorithms behind the content stream itself. It could easily allow them to direct the discourse and essentially have a pulse on America from a citizen perspective. I could see how this might be seen as a national risk with a country we may very well end up at war with in the not so distant future.

  • First time I've heard of Lemon8. Their description reads:

    "Lemon8 is a lifestyle community focused app powered by TikTok, where you can discover and share authentic content on a variety of topics such as beauty, fashion, travel, food, and more."

    I was waiting for them to bring up the democracy-destabilizing psyops operated by hostile state actors.

  • "Bik-Bok".
    No law against that.

  • So, this is where I land: Pausing the ban does not solve anything. It delays enforcement, emboldens ByteDance, and risks sending a message that U.S. national security is negotiable. NB: the TikTok ban isn't about free speech or economic hegemony, contrary to all the trolling bullshit this topic has produced. It is about national security, and the sovereign right of a nation -- any nation -- to protect itself from foreign influence.

    With that said, switching users to Lemon8 is not a solution; it is a dodge

Slashdot Top Deals

MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way. -- Henry Spencer

Close