"we have provided thousands of pages of written responses and hundreds of thousands of documents"<p>I see that all the time when people haven't actually provided the requested info, whether a company or a local, state, or federal agency. It's often a form of BS.<p>Technically every DB entry could be considered a document, but if you haven't provided emails from the CEO, you haven't provided emails from the CEO.
I can never really understand Facebook's approach to dealing with legal pressure surrounding its privacy practices.<p>Increased data privacy regulation could be an existential threat to Facebook's business model—but instead of trying to make a positive impression of itself by cooperating with lawmakers (and potentially helping to shape the regulation itself in the process), it misleads and stonewalls.[0]<p>What's Facebook's long-term plan here? Do they think they will be able to fend off governments forever and eventually become supranational?<p>[0] <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-misled-parliament-on-data-misuse-u-k-committee-says/" rel="nofollow">https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-misled-parliament-on-d...</a>
Part of this is that lawmakers don't want to be too agressive. If they ostensibly solve the privacy dilemmas related to facebook, they'll have to find a new outrage to parade out in front of voters and that requires them to learn about that new outrage as well. Instead it's a better strategy to milk an existing outrage until there are diminishing returns and only then move onto or manufacturing the next outrage. It's legislative theatre for the sake of getting re-elected term after term.