Unclear. There was hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn but that focused on whether it was unauthorized access under the CFAA. In X Corp. v. Bright Data Ltd., a quick skim su

Unclear. There was hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn but that focused on whether it was unauthorized access under the CFAA. In X Corp. v. Bright Data Ltd., a quick skim suggests ExTwitter's ToS lost because (A) it wasn't really the owner of the content and (B) they couldn't easily show harm. IANAL again, but for personal blog, (A) is unlikely to apply, and (B) could be shown if ArtTheft Inc. starts causing legal fees by threatening the blogger for exercising the re-licensing in the ToS.