> To stop the surveillance, [they] would have to get their equipment suppliers to make changes; they would have to change their own back-office systems; they would have to reformulate customer contracts so they would not rely on the data being available in case of disputes; and so on.
> [It] would cost [them] more money to stop the surveillance of their customers than to continue doing it.
> That is quite literally what "surveillance too cheap to meter" means.
> To stop the surveillance, [they] would have to get their equipment suppliers to make changes; they would have to change their own back-office systems; they would have to reformulate customer contracts so they would not rely on the data being available in case of disputes; and so on.
> [It] would cost [them] more money to stop the surveillance of their customers than to continue doing it.
> That is quite literally what "surveillance too cheap to meter" means.