What's a better way to refer to the bill than a "ban"? I want to know what other people would use as a more "accurate" term. I know that reducing an entire bill to a single term runs the risk of oversimplifying, but it can also be a normal technique of communicating with laypeople like myself.<p>From the law in question, here is the excerpt that I think is the most important part [1]:<p>> (a) In General.—<p>> (1) PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS.—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:<p>> (A) Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.<p>> (B) Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.<p>Copying what I wrote elsewhere: An alternative to getting banned is divesting to a US company. You might think of that as "getting banned is an alternative to divesting to a US company", but I think that's the wrong framing in consideration of US TikTok users, who by default have a First Amendment right to use TikTok as long as TikTok willingly continues offering service to the US.