These companies are just as afraid, if not far more afraid, of "the implication" from other companies, namely their advertisers and sponsors, as well as influen

These companies are just as afraid, if not far more afraid, of "the implication" from other companies, namely their advertisers and sponsors, as well as influential individuals such as celebrity influencers who drive traffic for their sites. The G-men will have to get in line for Twitter bending over backwards to all of these interests. Threats to the bottom line are probably even more menacing than legal threats- and many of these businesses and individuals are just as litigious as the FBI, as well. > FBI calls you up and tell you what they think, and you'll totally ignore FBI. Totally. The OP literally says that's an option that certain companies have opted to do: > An FBI agent just reached out with a key point about the “gross” subservience of Twitter before the FBI: “A lot of companies we deal with are adversarial to us. Like T-Mobile is totally adversarial. They love leaking things we're saying if we don't get our process right.” (1/2) > “I feel like that’s the default position. People used to get mad about that in the Bureau, but — they're supposed to represent their clients and their customers. Why in the hell would you expect them to make it easy on you? Do the right thing. Do it the right way.” https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603890210252668928 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603890210252668928 It sounds like Twitter was choosing to play nice with the feds, unless any evidence of coercion arises.