Overview
Title
To require any person that maintains an internet website or that sells or distributes a mobile application that is owned, wholly or partially, by a foreign adversary country, by a foreign adversary country-owned-entity, or by a non-state-owned entity located in a foreign adversary country, or that stores and maintains information collected from such website or application in a foreign adversary country, to disclose that fact to any individual who downloads or otherwise uses such website or application.
ELI5 AI
S. 4598 is a bill that says companies must tell people if their apps or websites are from countries the U.S. doesn't trust, or if they keep personal info in those countries, just like telling the truth about where their toys are made.
Summary AI
S. 4598 is a bill introduced to ensure transparency about the ownership and data storage of internet websites and mobile applications associated with foreign adversary countries. The bill requires anyone maintaining or distributing such platforms to disclose whether the service is partially or wholly owned by an entity in a foreign adversary country, or if the collected information is stored there. Any false disclosures are prohibited under this act. The Federal Trade Commission is tasked with enforcing these provisions, treating violations as unfair or deceptive acts under existing federal laws.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Bill
The "Internet Application Integrity and Disclosure Act," also referred to as the "Internet Application I.D. Act," aims to increase transparency about the ownership and data handling of internet websites and mobile apps. The bill requires that any individual or entity managing a website or mobile app that is partly or wholly owned by a foreign adversary country—or stores user data in such a country—must disclose this information to users. This disclosure must indicate whether a foreign adversary country or its entities have access to any collected information. The bill mandates that these disclosures be clearly presented to all users and stipulates that providing false information is illegal. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is tasked with enforcing these regulations.
Significant Issues
The bill raises several issues that could affect its implementation and public understanding:
Complexity of Definitions: The bill refers to external legal documents for crucial definitions, such as what constitutes a "foreign adversary country." This reliance on external references may create confusion for those unfamiliar with the detailed legal context.
Lack of Specified Penalties: While the bill makes it unlawful to provide false disclosures, it lacks detailed penalties for non-compliance. This gap might lead to ambiguity in enforcement and consequences.
Ambiguity in Legal Language: Legal jargon and cross-references to acts such as the Federal Trade Commission Act are not elaborated upon, potentially making the bill difficult to understand without legal expertise.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this legislation could play a pivotal role in enhancing consumer awareness about who controls their data and where it resides. For the general public, it aims to provide clearer insight into potential national security concerns associated with digital data handling. However, because the bill requires the understanding of specific legal references, individuals may find it challenging to comprehend the full scope of protections or limitations offered.
By requiring greater transparency about ownership and data handling practices, individuals may become more cautious about which apps or websites they choose to use, especially if those are linked to foreign adversaries. This could drive a demand for more robust privacy controls and domestic applications.
Impact on Stakeholders
Positive Impacts
Consumers: Users could benefit from enhanced transparency and data protection, potentially leading to greater trust in the services they choose to use. With clearer disclosures, users can make more informed decisions about downloading or using a website or app.
Technology Companies Providing Clear Disclosures: Companies that comply will potentially gain a competitive edge by promoting transparency and building trust with their user base.
Negative Impacts
App and Website Developers: Developers whose apps or websites involve foreign ownership or data storage may face increased scrutiny and potential loss of user trust. They might also incur legal or logistical costs to comply with the disclosure requirements.
Companies in Foreign Adversary Countries: These entities might experience reduced market penetration and revenue from U.S. users if consumers choose to avoid apps associated with foreign adversaries.
Regulatory Authorities: The FTC might encounter challenges in effectively enforcing these regulations due to the vagueness of the defined penalties and the intricacies of determining compliance across potentially thousands of digital platforms.
Overall, while the bill seeks to enhance transparency and protect consumer data, its effectiveness may be curtailed by the complex legal language and potential challenges in implementation and enforcement.
Issues
The bill requires disclosure if an internet website or mobile application is owned or data is stored in a 'foreign adversary country,' referring to another document for the definition (section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code), which may be unclear and inaccessible to the general public. This issue is outlined in Section 2.
The definition of 'non-state-owned entity located in a foreign adversary country' relies on legal references (section 800.208 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations) which can be complex, making it difficult for those without legal expertise to understand. This issue is mentioned in Section 2.
Ambiguity in the enforcement mechanism, as the bill references the Federal Trade Commission Act without summarizing its key points, might cause confusion for readers not familiar with the Act. This is highlighted in Section 3.
The bill does not detail the specific penalties for non-compliance or for disclosing false information, leading to potential uncertainty about the consequences. This issue is raised in both Section 2 and Section 3.
The inclusion of 'PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES' without explanation in Section 3 might create confusion, as the specific privileges and immunities applicable under the Federal Trade Commission Act are not detailed.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Internet Application Integrity and Disclosure Act, also called the Internet Application I.D. Act, is the official name of this legislative act.
2. Disclosure requirements relating to ownership, storage, and maintenance of information in a foreign adversary country Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
One year after the law is enacted, anyone who manages or provides access to certain websites or mobile apps must inform users if the service is partly or fully owned by a country considered a foreign adversary, if user data is stored in such a country, or if the country has access to the data. It is illegal to knowingly provide false information about these matters.
3. Enforcement Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In Section 3, the bill states that breaking this law counts as an unfair or deceptive practice according to existing Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rules. The FTC is given the responsibility to enforce this law using its usual powers, while those found guilty will face penalties and still have rights under the FTC Act. The section also clarifies that this law does not reduce the FTC's authority granted by other laws.