During a roundtable discussion on PBS-TV, several news reporters discussed this topic, and while two of them objected not just to the secrecy but to the substance of the deal, two others found fault only with the secrecy while finding the idea of the deal quite palatable. As pointed out by many in the past, including yours truly, we have here once again a way government intrudes upon the free society via the process of making something public that never should have been made so. There is no justification for this in a free society. It is socialist governments that characteristically nationalize important resources in the countries which they rule. Socialism is the political philosophy according to which individuals do not even exist but are only dependent parts of the larger whole that is society.
Private property is anathema to socialism.
The institution of the right to private property is a concrete, practical implementation of individual rights. It makes the free exercise of religion, of freedom of speech and expression possible for individuals. They can thus act independently of the wishes of others, should they so choose, including of the wishes of the government which in such a society has as its proper role the adjudication of disputes about conflicting rights claims. Beyond such adjudication, and the associated legal processes, governments in a free society are supposed to refrain from running the various tasks people may wish to embark upon, including providing entertainment in return for payment or advertising time. The beginning of the corruption of the proper role of government is the transformation of a system of private property rights into a system of public ownership of valued resources.