印第安纳州上诉法院恢复了针对TikTok提出的诉讼指控，TikTok被指控误导用户关于其平台对儿童不当内容的水平以及消费者个人资料的安全性。
在周一发布的3-0裁决中，该州上诉法庭的一个三人小组推翻了去年11月由一位法官作出的决定。当时这位法官否定了印第安纳州于2022年12月针对TikTok提出的两起诉讼，并驳回这些诉讼案。
这两项合并的诉讼主张，应用包含“引人入胜且不当的内容”，尽管公司宣称它对13岁及以下儿童是安全的。诉讼还声称该应用程序误导消费者相信其敏感和私人信息的安全性。
在去年11月判决中，艾伦县高等法院法官珍妮弗·德格鲁特（Jennifer L. DeGroote）裁定，她的法庭缺乏对该案件的个人管辖权，并确认了之前有关下载免费应用不属于印第安纳州欺诈消费者销售法案（Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act）中的消费交易的法院判决。
然而，在周一的裁决中，保罗·马西亚斯法官代表上诉法庭指出，TikTok在印第安纳州数百万用户和2021年公司报告的46亿美元印第安纳州收入构成了公司与该州之间足够的联系，使印第安纳州法院对TikTok具有管辖权。Times of Northwest Indiana报道。
马西亚斯法官也写道，在没有实际支付的情况下，TikTok提供其视频内容库的访问权作为换取印第安纳州用户个人数据的业务模式，即使不存在交易费用，也符合法律规定中的“消费交易”。他解释道：
“‘销售’一词的基本和普通定义，在DSCA中未作特别定义，包括用于完成财产转移的所有考虑因素，并不仅限于金钱交换。”马西亚斯写道。
“不争的事实是TikTok以用户个人数据换取其应用程序的内容库的访问权。这是TikTok与最终用户的交易协议。并且根据基本和普遍使用该词的方式，在这种情况下，是通过个人数据交换访问TikTok内容库的‘销售’。因此，TikTok的业务模式被认定为印第安纳州欺诈消费者销售法中的消费交易。”
印第安纳州总检察长托德·罗基塔（Todd Rokita）办公室发言人周二发表声明表示：“上诉法院采取了常识性的方法，并同意我们办公室提出的论点，即没有争议的问题是印第安纳州已经确立了对TikTok的具体个人管辖权。”。
该发言人继续说道：“通过从印第安纳州消费者处赚取2021年的46亿美元收入，TikTok在该州开展业务，因此需接受本案诉讼。”
周二下午，《美联社》给TikTok的首席律师留下了电话消息寻求对此判决发表评论。ByteDance公司拥有TikTok，于2020年将总部迁至新加坡，并受到去年以来国会和联邦立法者的关注，他们认为中国政府可能访问该应用的用户数据。
托德·罗基塔多次敦促印第安纳州居民“出于爱国之心删除”TikTok应用程序，因为他怀疑其与中国共产党的关联。
新闻来源：www.abcnews.go.com
原文地址：Appeals court reinstates Indiana lawsuit against TikTok alleging child safety, privacy concerns
新闻日期：2024-10-01
原文摘要：
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reinstated a lawsuit filed by the state accusing TikTok of deceiving its users about the video-sharing platform's level of inappropriate content for children and the security of its consumers’ personal information. In a 3-0 ruling issued Monday, a three-judge panel of the state appeals court reversed two November 2023 decisions by an Allen County judge which dismissed a pair of lawsuits the state had filed in December 2022 against TikTok. Those suits, which have been consolidated, allege the app contains “salacious and inappropriate content” despite the company claiming it is safe for children 13 years and under. The litigation also argues that the app deceives consumers into believing their sensitive and personal information is secure. In November's ruling, Allen Superior Court Judge Jennifer L. DeGroote found that her court lacked personal jurisdiction over the case and reaffirmed a previous court ruling which found that downloading a free app does not count as a consumer transaction under the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act. But in Monday's ruling, Judge Paul Mathias wrote on behalf of the appeals court that TikTok’s millions of Indiana users and the $46 million in Indiana-based income the company reported in 2021 create sufficient contact between the company and the state to establish the jurisdiction of Indiana’s courts over TikTok, The Times of Northwest Indiana reported. Mathias also wrote that TikTok’s business model of providing access to its video content library in exchange for the personal data of its Indiana users counts as a “consumer transaction” under the law, even if no payment is involved. “The plain and ordinary definition of the word ‘sale,’ which is not otherwise defined in the DCSA, includes any consideration to effectuate the transfer of property, not only an exchange for money,” Mathias wrote. “It is undisputed that TikTok exchanges access to its app’s content library for end-user personal data. That is the bargain between TikTok and its end-users. And, under the plain and ordinary use of the word, that is a ‘sale’ of access to TikTok’s content library for the end-user’s personal data. TikTok’s business model is therefore a consumer transaction under the DCSA.” A spokesperson for the Indiana Attorney General's office said Tuesday in a statement that the appeals court “took a common sense approach and agreed with our office’s argument that there’s simply no serious question that Indiana has established specific personal jurisdiction over TikTok.” “By earning more $46 million dollars from Hoosier consumers in 2021, TikTok is doing business in the state and is therefore subject to this lawsuit,” the statement adds. The Associated Press left a message Tuesday afternoon for a lead attorney for TikTok seeking comment on the appeals court's ruling. TikTok is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company that moved its headquarters to Singapore in 2020. The app has been a target over the past year of state and federal lawmakers who say the Chinese government could access the app’s users’ data. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has repeatedly personally urged Hoosiers to ”patriotically delete″ the TikTok app due to its supposed ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
