Visitors at the booth of Bytedance Technology, which owns news aggregator app Jinri Toutiao and short video app Tik Tok and Douyin, at the China International Software Expo in June in Beijing. Photo:VCG

TikTok's bold move to sue the US government is the right way to defend the Chinese firm's interests in the face of unfair treatment; and while there is not much likelihood of Trump's executive order being fully reversed, the lawsuit may serve as a strategy via which the two sides can come to an agreement, Chinese lawyers said Monday.

The popular Chinese video-sharing app will file the federal lawsuit as soon as Tuesday, US National Public Radio reported, citing a person involved in the forthcoming suit. The case will be filed in the US District Court in the Southern District of California, where TikTok's US operations are based, according to the report.

ByteDance, the Chinese tech start-up that owns TikTok, said it was temporarily unable to share details of the lawsuit's progress when the Global Times enquired on Monday.

With the increasing presence of Chinese firms in global markets, some are rightly taking the initiative to defend their rights by shaking off the image of the "silent lamb" relentlessly squeezed by the US government, said the lawyers.

Following the executive order issued on Thursday by the Trump administration barring US companies and individuals from doing business with TikTok, ByteDance said in a statement: "We will pursue all remedies available to us in order to ensure that the rule of law is not discarded and that our company and our users are treated fairly - if not by the administration, then by the US courts." 

Liu Xinze, senior partner at Beijing DHH Law Firm, told the Global Times on Monday that the bold move by Chinese firms to take the US government to court should be commended.

"Resorting to the weapon of the rule of law instead of diplomatic means (to solve the problem) is a smart direction to go in, as the trend of Chinese firms going global is irreversible," Liu said.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei filed a lawsuit against the US government early last year over a ban that restricted federal agencies from using its products. Huawei said the US failed to provide evidence to support the ban, and the firm also rejected claims it had links to the Chinese government. The case is still in progress.

"TikTok's chances of winning the case against the executive order cannot be ruled out, although they are slim given that the political factor exceeds the factor of law itself," said Liu, adding that the case might turn into a drawn-out battle that could take at least one or two years.

Citing the independent judicial system in the US, the lawyers say that evidence will play a key role.

The CIA concluded there was "no evidence" that Chinese intelligence services have ever accessed data from TikTok, the New York Times reported Friday.

Hao Junbo, chief lawyer at the HAO Law Firm in Beijing, told the Global Times Monday that TikTok's legal team could cite the First Amendment of the US Constitution that guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition, and the Fifth Amendment that protects private property.

However, Hao said that US administrative officials do have discretion - in other words the power to act according to their own judgment and conscience - which means that when it comes to the issue of national security, the US government could use this power to affect the ruling.

"The lawsuit move serves more as a strategy that cracks open hope of settlement," Hao noted, citing the example of major Chinese machinery manufacturer Sany Group, which settled a lawsuit against the US government three years after the Chinese firm filed the suit in 2012.

The company filed a case against then US President Barack Obama in 2012 for issuing an executive order blocking the company's wind farm project in the US state of Oregon.

The US Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. ruled in 2014 that Ralls, the US company affiliated with Sany, must be allowed to challenge evidence that US President Barack Obama drew on to bar its operations connected to wind-farm projects in Oregon, the ruling of which marked a victory by the Chinese firm.