> It's sad how HN is here demanding meticulous adherence to a clause buried deep in the incumbent's ToS and pretending that violating it is some basic moral mis

> It's sad how HN is here demanding meticulous adherence to a clause buried deep in the incumbent's ToS and pretending that violating it is some basic moral misdeed. Probably because the context for a "TOS violation" is very different between a large company and an individual, and because the motives for this violation are venal. And because Uber is a serial violator of pretty much every rule it comes into contact with. I doubt you'd find many here who would see a problem with, say, a researcher violating the same clause to get data for a research project. Large companies can afford lawyers to read TOS documents. Normal people don't have the time or expertise to read them, usually. And who writes TOS documents in the first place? Large companies. It is a double standard if a company wants their TOS followed, but breaks other companies'. So it is coherent to argue that large companies have a higher burden to follow a TOS more "meticulously" than individuals do.