Because requiring a warrant means due process; it's part of the job of the government. Buying data is using tax payers' money, to buy private data of the tax p

Because requiring a warrant means due process; it's part of the job of the government. Buying data is using tax payers' money, to buy private data of the tax payers. It's entirely reasonable that tax payers are upset about this. > I think, if the information is too private to reveal to the government, it is certainly too private to be in the hands of an unaccountable unelected unauditable corporation in the first place. I disagree. The government can require the information to be revealed if there is due process; it's never totally "not available to the government". Corporations don't work for the people; the government does. Corporations cannot impose a rule on people by violence. The government can. They are fundamentally different; I don't see why one having the data leads to the justification of the other having the same unfettered access. People can be upset about what the government is doing, and impose restrictions to its access and power, even when what it did was technically legal. If the government is as frivolous as corporations can be and act, it's dangerous and worrying.