The TikTok algorithm could be split, claims a report, with a US-only version used for the hugely popular app to try to avoid a ban.

Developer Bytedance has tweeted that the report is not accurate, but its message appears to be more a repetition of its legal stance than a specific denial …

Forced sale of TikTok to a US company

Back in March, the House voted overwhelmingly to either ban TikTok from the US, or to force the sale of the app to an American-owned company. The Senate went with the forced sale option, and President Biden signed off on the bill.

TikTok is claiming that the action is unconstitutional, and suing the US government in order to get the decision ruled illegal.A number of TikTok creators have filed their own lawsuit. The official lawsuit has been fast-tracked to enable it to be heard before the deadline.

TikTok algorithm question

While the sale may be blocked by the courts, US investors are gearing up for a buyout.

However, the Chinese government has placed a legal block on the algorithm being sold to a US company, and would-be investors appear to have accepted that they won’t get it. The value of the app without the algorithm which drives it is questionable, to say the least.

Reuters claims that Bytedance is working on a US-only version of the algorithm.

TikTok is working on a clone of its recommendation algorithm for its 170 million U.S. users that may result in a version that operates independently of its Chinese parent and be more palatable to American lawmakers who want to ban it, according to sources with direct knowledge of the efforts.

The work on splitting the source code ordered by TikTok’s Chinese parent ByteDance late last year predated a bill to force a sale of TikTok’s U.S. operations that began gaining steam in Congress this year. 

The TikTok Policy account on X called the report inaccurate.

The Reuters story published today is misleading and factually inaccurate. As we said in our court filing, the ‘qualified divestiture’ demanded by the Act to allow TikTok to continue operating in the United States is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally. And certainly not on the 270-day timeline required by the Act.

However, the company does not say what specifically is wrong, and the wording appears to simply be a restatement of the position it had taken all along: That the forced sale cannot happen for both legal and technical reasons.

The latter claim is clearly untrue, as there would be absolutely nothing to prevent coders creating a new version of the recommendation engine.