The legal semantics are probably on their way to the Supreme Court. The ethical debate had settled into a soft consensus that this sort of thing was icky at be

The legal semantics are probably on their way to the Supreme Court. The ethical debate had settled into a soft consensus that this sort of thing was icky at best on topics ranging from FB leveraging the Harvard facebooks to Uber ignoring medallion laws to Google scanning all those books to AMP cutting the publisher out of the loop to Amazon eating the OSHA fines rather than give the workers bathroom breaks to FB/Google paying the fines and laughing over EU regulations (which in fairness they seemed to have backed down on), to currently Apple trying to malicious compliance the DMA gatekeeper regulations. Some of this stuff has been litigated, some not, all of it is cringe-worthy, this is a new low. The parent cited germane examples from the list. That adds to the discussion. Folks are free to do the moderate effort thing and write a dissenting reply, they’re not supposed to do the lazy thing and grey out something they spinal-reflex don’t like. You took the time to write a reply, so even though I think you’re wrong, I applaud you taking the time to state a position.