> democracy and due process is well established Democracy and due process are only well established to the extent that the values that underpin them are suppor

> democracy and due process is well established Democracy and due process are only well established to the extent that the values that underpin them are supported and taken to heart by the people. These values aren't self evident on a collective level. Social-economic, political, ecological, technological, cultural climates are either favourable or make upholding them rather difficult. > you are not intent on doing illegal things This is the exact crux of the matter. What is legal or illegal is subject to change and hinges entirely on who's in power. > it can only help law enforcement You could be happily giving up your personal data to authorities in a stable, peaceful context where law enforcement policies are genuinely geared towards protecting individual civilians and upholding basic human rights. It's far harder to retract that when context shift and that same data is used to actively enforce policies that pull away from those same human rights. A functional representative democracy consists of a separation of judicial, executive and legal branches consisting of elected mandates that can and should be held accountable at all times. Justice implies that any and all citizens are treated equally and impartial within the confines of that system. Facebook feeling that they aren't treated equally because they can't enforce their trademark? That's entirely valid. But those feelings don't justify a demand that society should compromise on fundamental principles of judicial or legal equality or impartiality in order to enable Facebook to crack down on trademark infringement at their own discretion (not to mention the blatant violation of privacy attached to that). All in all, the main difference between Facebook and a small time forum administrator is scale. Facebook has 70 billion dollars a year in revenue whereas the latter my earn pennies on Google ads. The size of that revenue can never be an argument to compromise on basic human rights for billions or change how legal systems favour particular private actors because they pushed for relentless economic growth on their own accord. Of course, while it's obviously hard to enforce such principles in all cases, the trouble with adding exceptions is that they gradually erode those same principles and values until they become meaningless. There's a reason why Lady Justice wears a blindfold, after all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice