Not the person you were responding to, but IMO it’s the defense attorneys / legal department working to ensure that the legal outcome is as beneficial to the corporations as possible, even if they “lose”. In this case the fine is a cost of doing business, not nearly enough to actually discourage malfeasance and the legal/ PR pivot to blaming encryption rather than their algorithms is something they hope will tee them up to be able to do even more massive surveillance in the near future.

Yeah, the ones the vent doesn’t catch fire

Negative externalities like these must be re-imposed on polluting companies through democratic governance. Regulatory capture and subversion are carried out by individuals and must be treated as crimes against humanity.

You sound insufferable

Possibly like this