US Supreme Court Upholds Law Banning TikTok If It’s Not Sold by Its Chinese Parent Company

A person live streams to their TikTok followers as the high justices rule to uphold a ban on the video-sharing app TikTok in the TikTok vs. Merrick Garland case in Washington, DC, USA, 17 January 2025. (EPA)
A person live streams to their TikTok followers as the high justices rule to uphold a ban on the video-sharing app TikTok in the TikTok vs. Merrick Garland case in Washington, DC, USA, 17 January 2025. (EPA)
TT

US Supreme Court Upholds Law Banning TikTok If It’s Not Sold by Its Chinese Parent Company

A person live streams to their TikTok followers as the high justices rule to uphold a ban on the video-sharing app TikTok in the TikTok vs. Merrick Garland case in Washington, DC, USA, 17 January 2025. (EPA)
A person live streams to their TikTok followers as the high justices rule to uphold a ban on the video-sharing app TikTok in the TikTok vs. Merrick Garland case in Washington, DC, USA, 17 January 2025. (EPA)

The Supreme Court on Friday unanimously upheld the federal law banning TikTok beginning Sunday unless it's sold by its China-based parent company, holding that the risk to national security posed by its ties to China overcomes concerns about limiting speech by the app or its 170 million users in the United States.

A sale does not appear imminent and, although experts have said the app will not disappear from existing users' phones once the law takes effect on Jan. 19, new users won't be able to download it and updates won't be available. That will eventually render the app unworkable, the Justice Department has said in court filings.

The decision came against the backdrop of unusual political agitation by President-elect Donald Trump, who vowed that he could negotiate a solution and the administration of President Joe Biden, which has signaled it won't enforce the law beginning Sunday, his final full day in office.

Trump, mindful of TikTok’s popularity, and his own 14.7 million followers on the app, finds himself on the opposite side of the argument from prominent Senate Republicans who fault TikTok’s Chinese owner for not finding a buyer before now. Trump said in a Truth Social post shortly before the decision was issued that TikTok was among the topics in his conversation Friday with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

It’s unclear what options are open to Trump once he is sworn in as president on Monday. The law allowed for a 90-day pause in the restrictions on the app if there had been progress toward a sale before it took effect. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who defended the law at the Supreme Court for the Democratic Biden administration, told the justices last week that it's uncertain whether the prospect of a sale once the law is in effect could trigger a 90-day respite for TikTok.

“Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,” the court said in an unsigned opinion, adding that the law “does not violate petitioners' First Amendment rights.”

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch filed short separate opinions noting some reservations about the court's decision but going along with the outcome.

“Without doubt, the remedy Congress and the President chose here is dramatic,” Gorsuch wrote. Still, he said he was persuaded by the argument that China could get access to “vast troves of personal information about tens of millions of Americans.”

Some digital rights groups slammed the court’s ruling shortly after it was released.

“Today’s unprecedented decision upholding the TikTok ban harms the free expression of hundreds of millions of TikTok users in this country and around the world,” said Kate Ruane, a director at the Washington-based Center for Democracy & Technology, which has supported TikTok’s challenge to the federal law.

Content creators who opposed the law also worried about the effect on their business if TikTok shuts down. “I’m very, very concerned about what’s going to happen over the next couple weeks,” said Desiree Hill, owner of Crown’s Corner mechanic shop in Conyers, Georgia. “And very scared about the decrease that I’m going to have in reaching customers and worried I’m going to potentially lose my business in the next six months.”

At arguments, the justices were told by a lawyer for TikTok and ByteDance Ltd., the Chinese technology company that is its parent, how difficult it would be to consummate a deal, especially since Chinese law restricts the sale of the proprietary algorithm that has made the social media platform wildly successful.

The app allows users to watch hundreds of videos in about half an hour because some are only a few seconds long, according to a lawsuit filed last year by Kentucky complaining that TikTok is designed to be addictive and harms kids' mental health. Similar suits were filed by more than a dozen states. TikTok has called the claims inaccurate.

The dispute over TikTok's ties to China has come to embody the geopolitical competition between Washington and Beijing.

“ByteDance and its Chinese Communist masters had nine months to sell TikTok before the Sunday deadline,” Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., wrote on X. “The very fact that Communist China refuses to permit its sale reveals exactly what TikTok is: a communist spy app. The Supreme Court correctly rejected TikTok’s lies and propaganda masquerading as legal arguments.”

The US has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits, that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect.

TikTok points out the US has not presented evidence that China has attempted to manipulate content on its US platform or gather American user data through TikTok.

Bipartisan majorities in Congress passed legislation and Biden signed it into law in April. The law was the culmination of a yearslong saga in Washington over TikTok, which the government sees as a national security threat.

TikTok, which sued the government last year over the law, has long denied it could be used as a tool of Beijing. A three-judge panel made up of two Republican appointees and a Democratic appointee unanimously upheld the law in December, prompting TikTok’s quick appeal to the Supreme Court.

Without a sale to an approved buyer, the law bars app stores operated by Apple, Google and others from offering TikTok beginning on Sunday. Internet hosting services also will be prohibited from hosting TikTok.

ByteDance has said it won’t sell. But some investors have been eyeing it, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire businessman Frank McCourt. McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative has said it and its unnamed partners have presented a proposal to ByteDance to acquire TikTok’s US assets. The consortium, which includes “Shark Tank” host Kevin O’Leary, did not disclose the financial terms of the offer.

McCourt, in a statement following the ruling, said his group was “ready to work with the company and President Trump to complete a deal.”

Prelogar told the justices last week that having the law take effect “might be just the jolt” ByteDance needs to reconsider its position.



Siemens Energy Trebles Profit as AI Boosts Power Demand

FILED - 05 August 2025, Berlin: The "Siemens Energy" logo can be seen in the entrance area of the company. Photo: Britta Pedersen/dpa
FILED - 05 August 2025, Berlin: The "Siemens Energy" logo can be seen in the entrance area of the company. Photo: Britta Pedersen/dpa
TT

Siemens Energy Trebles Profit as AI Boosts Power Demand

FILED - 05 August 2025, Berlin: The "Siemens Energy" logo can be seen in the entrance area of the company. Photo: Britta Pedersen/dpa
FILED - 05 August 2025, Berlin: The "Siemens Energy" logo can be seen in the entrance area of the company. Photo: Britta Pedersen/dpa

German turbine maker Siemens Energy said Wednesday that its quarterly profits had almost tripled as the firm gains from surging demand for electricity driven by the artificial intelligence boom.

The company's gas turbines are used to generate electricity for data centers that provide computing power for AI, and have been in hot demand as US tech giants like OpenAI and Meta rapidly build more of the sites.

Net profit in the group's fiscal first quarter, to end-December, climbed to 746 million euros ($889 million) from 252 million euros a year earlier.

Orders -- an indicator of future sales -- increased by a third to 17.6 billion euros.

The company's shares rose over five percent in Frankfurt trading, putting the stock up about a quarter since the start of the year and making it the best performer to date in Germany's blue-chip DAX index.

"Siemens Energy ticked all of the major boxes that investors were looking for with these results," Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a note, adding that the company's gas turbine orders were "exceptionally strong".

US data center electricity consumption is projected to more than triple by 2035, according to the International Energy Agency, and already accounts for six to eight percent of US electricity use.

Asked about rising orders on an earnings call, Siemens Energy CEO Christian Bruch said he thought the first-quarter figures were not "particularly strong" and that further growth could be expected.

"Demand for gas turbines is extremely high," he said. "We're talking about 2029 and 2030 for delivery dates."

Siemens Energy, spun out of the broader Siemens group in 2020, said last week that it would spend $1 billion expanding its US operations, including a new equipment plant in Mississippi as part of wider plans that would create 1,500 jobs.

Its shares have increased over tenfold since 2023, when the German government had to provide the firm with credit guarantees after quality problems at its wind-turbine unit.


Instagram Boss to Testify at Social Media Addiction Trial 

The Instagram app icon is seen on a smartphone in this illustration taken October 27, 2025. (Reuters)
The Instagram app icon is seen on a smartphone in this illustration taken October 27, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Instagram Boss to Testify at Social Media Addiction Trial 

The Instagram app icon is seen on a smartphone in this illustration taken October 27, 2025. (Reuters)
The Instagram app icon is seen on a smartphone in this illustration taken October 27, 2025. (Reuters)

Instagram chief Adam Mosseri is to be called to testify Wednesday in a Los Angeles courtroom by lawyers out to prove social media is dangerously addictive by design to young, vulnerable minds.

YouTube and Meta -- the parent company of Instagram and Facebook -- are defendants in a blockbuster trial that could set a legal precedent regarding whether social media giants deliberately designed their platforms to be addictive to children.

Rival lawyers made opening remarks to jurors this week, with an attorney for YouTube insisting that the Google-owned video platform was neither intentionally addictive nor technically social media.

"It's not social media addiction when it's not social media and it's not addiction," YouTube lawyer Luis Li told the 12 jurors during his opening remarks.

The civil trial in California state court centers on allegations that a 20-year-old woman, identified as Kaley G.M., suffered severe mental harm after becoming addicted to social media as a child.

She started using YouTube at six and joined Instagram at 11, before moving on to Snapchat and TikTok two or three years later.

The plaintiff "is not addicted to YouTube. You can listen to her own words -- she said so, her doctor said so, her father said so," Li said, citing evidence he said would be detailed at trial.

Li's opening arguments followed remarks on Monday from lawyers for the plaintiffs and co-defendant Meta.

On Monday, the plaintiffs' attorney Mark Lanier told the jury YouTube and Meta both engineer addiction in young people's brains to gain users and profits.

"This case is about two of the richest corporations in history who have engineered addiction in children's brains," Lanier said.

"They don't only build apps; they build traps."

But Li told the six men and six women on the jury that he did not recognize the description of YouTube put forth by the other side and tried to draw a clear line between YouTube's widely popular video app and social media platforms like Instagram or TikTok.

YouTube is selling "the ability to watch something essentially for free on your computer, on your phone, on your iPad," Li insisted, comparing the service to Netflix or traditional TV.

Li said it was the quality of content that kept users coming back, citing internal company emails that he said showed executives rejecting a pursuit of internet virality in favor of educational and more socially useful content.

- 'Gateway drug' -

Stanford University School of Medicine professor Anna Lembke, the first witness called by the plaintiffs, testified that she views social media, broadly speaking, as a drug.

The part of the brain that acts as a brake when it comes to having another hit is not typically developed before a person is 25 years old, Lembke, the author of the book "Dopamine Nation," told jurors.

"Which is why teenagers will often take risks that they shouldn't and not appreciate future consequences," Lembke testified.

"And typically, the gateway drug is the most easily accessible drug," she said, describing Kaley's first use of YouTube at the age of six.

The case is being treated as a bellwether proceeding whose outcome could set the tone for a wave of similar litigation across the United States.

Social media firms face hundreds of lawsuits accusing them of leading young users to become addicted to content and suffer from depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalization, and even suicide.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs are borrowing strategies used in the 1990s and 2000s against the tobacco industry, which faced a similar onslaught of lawsuits arguing that companies knowingly sold a harmful product.


OpenAI Starts Testing Ads in ChatGPT

The OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
The OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

OpenAI Starts Testing Ads in ChatGPT

The OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
The OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)

OpenAI has begun placing ads in the basic versions of its ChatGPT chatbot, a bet that users will not mind the interruptions as the company seeks revenue as its costs soar.

"The test will be for logged-in adult users on the Free and Go subscription tiers" in the United States, OpenAI said Monday. The Go subscription costs $8 in the United States.

Only a small percentage of its nearly one billion users pay for its premium subscription services, which will remain ad-free.

"Ads do not influence the answers ChatGPT gives you, and we keep your conversations with ChatGPT private from advertisers," the company said.

Since ChatGPT's launch in 2022, OpenAI's valuation has soared to $500 billion in funding rounds -- higher than any other private company. Some analysts expect it could go public with a trillion-dollar valuation.

But the ChatGPT maker burns through cash at a furious rate, mostly on the powerful computing required to deliver its services.

Its chief executive Sam Altman had long expressed his dislike for advertising, citing concerns that it could create distrust about ChatGPT's content.

His about-face garnered a jab from its rival Anthropic over the weekend, which made its advertising debut at the Super Bowl championship with commercials saying its Claude chatbot would stay ad-free.