Most of us are not in lines of business that are so easy to cook up excuses for raids about, nor have a past that makes it so easy to try to make us come out looking like Bond villains.
I'm not saying there are not plenty of cases where "just taking the servers" is a viable option. But that does not mean there aren't a lot of us for whom protecting against NSA to the extent feasible is an option that is not ever likely to result in someone raiding our servers.
> GCHQ is a different problem to the NSA - they appear to try to obey the law but have weak oversight and scrutiny
Arguably the NSA tries to come down on the right side of the law too. It's just that they do so by creatively exploiting every available loophole and making use of every possible discretion of their lawyers and lax oversight as well.
I'm not so sure GCHQ wouldn't do the same if their oversight wasn't such a joke that they were found to boast about how weak it is in one of the NSA documents.
Being in a different country didn't help Kimdotcom.
GCHQ is a different problem to the NSA - they appear to try to obey the law but have weak oversight and scrutiny. There are at least some politicians who don't want to give GCHQ more power and who think they need better regulation.