I don't like the word "share" in this context: these financial companies didn't simply give away info, they got something in return and I would like more info about what they got.
Every company running ads on the internet is making this value exchange, but these financial companies screwed up by pouring protected data into Google's and Meta's dumb pipes.
It seems like we have a name for such transaction. Where one party gives something to get something else from second party.
It's called sale. Not sharing.
We also have words for one party giving something that doesn't belong to them, or which they are not entitled to give. They're somewhere between embezzlement and theft.
When its information that can be copied it would usually be called sharing (because both parties still have what they started with, but both have 'more' as they have shared with the other).
If you are arguing semantics, sale is probably the wrong term and 'sharing' is probably more accurate.
I thought the definition of "sale" is the exchange of a thing for consideration. The consideration is usually money, but doesn't have to be.
But I had to look it up. My definition was a bit too expansive, but not by much. The first one in the American Heritage dictionary is
The exchange of goods or services for
an amount of money or its equivalent;
the act of selling.
I think "sharing" is less accurate. Maximal pedantic accuracy is probably "bartered".
The one that isn't accurate though would be sale, which is an exchange for money.
I would say that despite the casual use of "share" such as in your example, that isn't really "sharing". It's bartering. The use of the car is predicated on getting something in return, so it's an exchange of value.
1. Data sold to Natsec/FBI/CIA/NSA etc
2. Data sold to IRS
3. Data sold to state tax authority
4. Data sold to police agencies
5. Data sold to *churches* ( https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/catholic-group-buying-data-to-out-gay-priests )
... to bastardize Cardinal Richelieu's quote
You are either deliberately making it sound more nefarious than it is or you didn’t read the article.