If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Democratic lawmakers have been criticized by Open AI CEO Sam Altman after what some commentators are calling politically motivated scrutiny of major technology executives following revelations that several Big Tech leaders personally donated to President-elect Donald Trump’s upcoming inauguration. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who contributed $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund, revealed the letter he was sent by Democrats – though other CEOs likely received similar letters. In a letter, signed by Democrat Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Michael Bennet (D-CO), dated January 17, 2025, Senate Democrats questioned Altman’s motivations behind his donation, insinuating that it was an attempt to influence the incoming administration’s policies. Read the letter in full here. “Big Tech companies, including OpenAI, have made million-dollar gifts to President-elect Donald Trump’s inaugural fund in what appears to be an effort to influence and sway the actions and policies of the incoming administration,” the letter stated. “We are concerned that your company and other Big Tech donors are using your massive contributions to the inaugural fund to cozy up to the incoming Trump administration in an effort to avoid scrutiny, limit regulation, and buy favor,” the letter bluntly adds. The letter asks a list of questions and demands a response by January 31st, 2025. Altman’s contribution is among several similar donations from other tech leaders, including Amazon, Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi. These donations are now being linked by Democrats to ongoing federal investigations into antitrust violations and labor law breaches, raising concerns about whether lawmakers are weaponizing their oversight powers for political gain. OpenAI itself is under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for consumer harm and faces a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) probe for allegedly misleading investors. Altman responded to the inquiry with a pointed remark on social media, stating, “funny, they never sent me one of these for contributing to democrats…” His comment adds to growing allegations of partisan double standards. Despite the senators’ concerns, political pressure campaigns against tech executives also set a dangerous precedent, where political donations could trigger retaliatory investigations, especially when the same scrutiny isn’t applied on a consistent basis. Several major technology companies contributed to President Joe Biden’s inauguration in 2021, also at a time where Biden was promising tech regulation. Notable contributors included: Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Qualcomm, Verizon, Comcast, Charter Communications, Anthem Inc., Boeing, Pfizer, Uber Technologies Inc., Lockheed Martin, Bank of America, AT&T, and more. These contributions were part of the $61.8 million raised for President Biden’s inauguration events. While Democrats frame their inquiry as a necessary check on corporate influence in politics, critics commenting on X have contended that it smacks of hypocrisy and selective outrage. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Democrat Senators Pressure Tech CEOs about Contributions to Trump Inauguration appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals has allowed Tennessee to start enforcing a state age verification law. It obligates adult sites to verify that their visitors are 18 or over, and do that by unmasking everyone by requiring a person’s photo ID, or “certain public or private transactional data” to ascertain their age. This is one of close to 20 similar laws, cited in the lawsuit against that adopted by Tennessee, where state Republicans behind the legislation say it is needed to protect children from harmful influence online – while those opposed argue that the efforts are both unconstitutional, First Amendment-wise, and ineffective. On December 30, a district court by and large approved a preliminary injunction motion submitted by the plaintiffs, adults entertainment trade group the Free Speech Coalition. The law was to come into force on January 1. But in a 3-0 ruling earlier this week, the appeals court judges greenlit the law’s implementation as the legal battle continues. We obtained a copy of the ruling for you here. Memphis District Court Judge Sheryl Lipman justified the decision to block the law’s enforcement in late December by stating that it “likely” harms adults’ First Amendment rights while failing to actually stop minors from accessing pornographic material online. Lipman argued that minors will use workarounds like VPNs to hide their location, and that they might turn to completely unregulated parts of the internet in search of this type of content, or simply use social media (that pass the one-third adult content threshold). But the state attorney-general appealed, and now the Sixth Circuit panel overturned the injunction, rejecting Judge Lipman’s stance that the law had the potential to suppress constitutional free speech protections. At the same time, children’s ability to access pornography online is described as easy, and having “devastating effects.” Moreover, the ruling touches on the fact that this is one of a number of similar laws, and that when it comes to Texas and Indiana, district courts’ decisions blocking them had also been overturned by the respective courts of appeal. “We see no reason to keep Tennessee’s law on ice while Texas and Indiana may enforce theirs (against at least one of the same plaintiffs), especially when the Supreme Court will soon offer guidance on the standard of review we should apply,” the Sixth Circuit stated. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Sixth Circuit Court Allows Tennessee to Enforce Online Digital ID Laws appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting is coming up and top representatives of this unelected group gathering global elites are “coming out of the woodwork” once again, together with a predictable set of policy endorsements. Many of those policies are built on ideas that originate and were first publicly voiced at the Davos meetings, to then over time become formalized by top-level international institutions like the United Nations (UN), making it somewhat difficult to understand which is older – the chicken or the egg. Ahead of the start of this year’s summit, WEF Managing Director Mirek Dusek told a news conference that the 2025 WEF meeting will focus on “AI” – specifically around “AI governance” and how governments handle the technology. At the same time, Dusek was praising related censorship and surveillance initiatives such as the upcoming France Summit for Action on Artificial Intelligence but also giving a nod to the UN’s High-level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence. The latter, in its role as a global AI watchdog, published a report in September that goes into a number of recommendations tied to surveillance and censorship. Here, Dusek appears to refer to it when he says that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres “achieved important success in September” by establishing a body referred to as “the first installment in terms of international collaboration around AI.” Always on the topic of “AI governance” the WEF official also praised the summit in France, coming up on February 10 and 11, which – for all of Dusek’s talk about “the intersection between AI governance and AI competitiveness” – critics see as, in reality, focusing on ways to control and censor AI development. Some of that focus in Paris will be on coming up with “common ground for international AI governance,” and also, combating “information manipulation” (especially on social networks) as well as “identifying and controlling higher risks that could arise from the uncontrolled use of AI” and, “defining standards for measuring these risks” which “could be a point of international convergence.” Dusek’s remarks during the press conference showed that the priorities are very much aligned – the WEF, which will meet just shortly before the Paris event, from January 20 to 24, is looking to move the needle on AI, its governance and development models in the “preferred direction.” True to form, the direction the WEF prefers is resolutely globalist. “Different governments have different approaches to how they look at AI governance,” Dusek told the press, adding, “It’s very important that there is dialogue across those different geographies so that they can have lessons learned, exchange views on what’s working, what’s not working.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post WEF Director Backs UN’s Pro-Censorship AI Watchdog, Praises France’s AI Summit on Control, and Announces 2025 Focus on AI Governance appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. As expected, the US Supreme Court has upheld a controversial law demanding TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest its ownership of the platform or face a sweeping ban across the country. This decision threatens to cut off access to the app for its 170 million American users, placing its future in the hands of incoming President Donald Trump. We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here. The law mandates ByteDance to finalize the sale of TikTok by January 19 — just one day before Trump re-enters the White House — or risk being banned nationwide. However, the Biden administration has said that it won’t enforce the law and will leave that to President Trump. President Trump has spoken out against the law. The White House remarked, “Given the sheer fact of timing, this administration recognizes that actions to implement the law simply must fall to the next administration, which takes office on Monday.” The administration further emphasized that TikTok should continue operating in the US, provided it is under American or otherwise non-threatening ownership: “TikTok should remain available to Americans, but simply under American ownership or other ownership that addresses the national security concerns identified by Congress in developing this law.” In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court acknowledged TikTok’s vital role in American digital life, stating, “There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community.” However, the Court backed Congress’s assertion that forced divestiture is necessary to mitigate national security risks tied to TikTok’s data practices and ties to a foreign adversary. Pressure is mounting on President Joe Biden to intervene and prevent TikTok from being banned in the United States as early as Sunday, a move that lawmakers argue would harm millions of creators and small businesses. Democratic Senator Ed Markey voiced the urgency on Thursday, stating, “We’re asking for the ability to be able to try rationally to resolve this issue so TikTok does not go dark. Let’s take a breath, try to step back, buy some time, try to figure this out.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also pressed Biden to extend the deadline for Chinese-owned ByteDance to divest TikTok’s US operations by 90 days. An aide confirmed Schumer’s efforts, emphasizing the potential disruption a ban would cause to the app’s 170 million American users. Schumer remarked, “It’s clear that more time is needed to find an American buyer and not disrupt the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans, of so many influencers who have built up a good network of followers.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Supreme Court Upholds Law Forcing ByteDance to Divest TikTok or Face US Ban, Leaving Decision to Incoming President Trump appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Outgoing President Joe Biden concluded his presidency with a farewell address on Wednesday night, sharply criticizing what he termed the “tech-industrial complex” while urging tighter accountability for social media platforms. Ironically, Biden’s remarks highlighted the decline of free press and the dangers of “misinformation,” even as his administration has often been linked to censorship efforts and suppression of dissenting viewpoints. During his speech, Biden drew parallels to President Dwight Eisenhower’s famous warning about the “military-industrial complex.” He stated, “Six decades later, I’m equally concerned about the potential rise of a tech-industrial complex that could pose real dangers for our country as well.” His comments painted a picture of concentrated power in the hands of tech oligarchs, whom he accused of enabling an “avalanche of misinformation and disinformation” to flourish unchecked. The president, leaving office with historically low approval ratings, accused social media platforms of abandoning fact-checking efforts and contributing to the erosion of public trust. “The free press is crumbling. Editors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact-checking,” Biden said. Biden’s condemnation of social media fact-checking policies appeared aimed directly at Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, whose platform recently transitioned away from third-party fact-checking to a “community notes” model reminiscent of the system employed by Elon Musk’s X. Throughout his presidency, Biden frequently championed tighter controls on digital platforms under the guise of protecting democracy and public health. However, critics argue his administration’s push for censorship often targeted dissenting views and stifled legitimate debate. Biden also lamented the decline of legacy media, suggesting that unchecked misinformation on digital platforms undermines democracy. “We must hold the social platforms accountable to protect our children, our families, and our very democracy from the abuse of power,” he declared. The president’s rhetoric on misinformation is not without controversy. He has faced repeated accusations of spreading false or unverifiable claims himself, such as recent remarks regarding Los Angeles utilities during wildfire discussions that local officials disputed. Regarding Covid vaccines, Biden also famously said: “You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations,” and added, “If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the IC unit, and you’re not going to die.” Those who challenged this idea found themselves banned on several social media platforms. Meta’s recently abandoned fact-checking model, which involved junior writers downgrading posts based on often-disputed analyses, has faced criticism for censoring accurate information that reflected poorly on Biden. The new community-based approach on X and Meta allows users to collaboratively evaluate content, signaling a move away from centralized content moderation. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Biden Warns of Tech Oligarchs’ Power in Farewell Speech, Ignoring His Own Role in Expanding Digital Censorship appeared first on Reclaim The Net.