And the proof is Snowden, because... ???
Or are you all just agreeing you have your own conspiracy theories, and aren't directly commenting on what each other are saying?
A simple & plausible scenario: a governmental agency requests Facebook conducts a broad surveillance sweep. Facebook resists for obvious reasons, goes to court. Somebody at the middle level of one talks to somebody at the middle level of the other, figure out what the agency really wants - a small, well specified chunk of data - which gets requested separately & promptly delivered. Having gotten enough data now, the agency lets the original, big case falter simply by limiting the efforts and expenditures.
That's not even conspiracy, that's just a bunch of people figuring out how to quickly get done with their mundane responsibilities. #BanalityOfEvil
That's, ummm, not my point at all, and I honestly don't see how you took it from what I wrote.
What I meant was just that Snowden's revelations revealed a bunch of 'alternative' methods, beyond a court-ordered wiretap. Collusion, cable tapping, shipping intercepts ... all seem to have been on the table for the NSA and GCHQ.
My point was just that I'd be very surprised if this court result prevented the type of interception that was being requested.