I don't know how to feel about this. If you as a state actor had a problem with people using rural roads to smuggle drugs instead of a highway, you would probably be in your right to monitor said rural roads, even though they're not used only for smuggling drugs.
It is well within their jurisdiction to do so, even though privacy may be threatened. Isn't it threatened anyways, since usually the hosting servers are in US, and all traffic to and from US is read by a bunch of NSA agents anyways? Is the problem that this data would not go to just US, but that other countries want a cut as well?
I don't know how to feel about this. If you as a state actor had a problem with people using rural roads to smuggle drugs instead of a highway, you would probably be in your right to monitor said rural roads, even though they're not used only for smuggling drugs.
It is well within their jurisdiction to do so, even though privacy may be threatened. Isn't it threatened anyways, since usually the hosting servers are in US, and all traffic to and from US is read by a bunch of NSA agents anyways? Is the problem that this data would not go to just US, but that other countries want a cut as well?