My thought is that the reported payments to compensate big corps aren't enough to justify the opportunity cost.
For example, Room 641A. No doubt NSA is putting some cash in, but the actual revenue is probably 1/1000th the cost to ATT. Renting rooms and taps to governments is not a business ATT would enter. It's just too small. They need revenues in the tens of millions to even consider a product, and it's unlikely NSA is paying that much. Where ATT can justify the cost is within its lobbying budget. On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Seth Woodworth <s...@sethish.com> wrote: > It's not legal to pay for preferential treatment from the government, > that's bribery. Why would it be illegal for the NSA to pay ATT & Chase? > > > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Lucas Gonze <lucas.go...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Let's say major corps like ATT and Chase are doing favors for NSA. Why >> would they if not for a quid pro quo? >> >> And if they are getting favors in return, isn't that illegal? >> >> I wonder if there is evidence to show what the payback is. >> >> >> -- >> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. >> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. >> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at >> compa...@stanford.edu. >> > > > -- > Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. > Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at > compa...@stanford.edu. >
-- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
