Scraping dating is not imposing work, worry and cost on additional people.
The victims of scraping are not going to do any additional work unless the scraped data is used irresponsibly, but that is separate from the act of scraping.
This email required people to do work and caused worry due to the legal threat that the email tried to lead people to believe was applicable to them. They may have had cost if they called a lawyer and it definitely took their time.
Scraping -> no work forced upon victims. That email -> work forced on unwilling victims.
Is there something I’m missing? People including that poster aren’t reaching this same conclusion but it seems very apparent so am I missing something?
Well, the argument of the GP is that "extra work" is not the only form of harm that is possible. When comparing the harm of extra work and stress due to this email to the harm of have your privacy violated by large, publicly-scraped datasets that include your personal information. For example, once your twitter post is collected in a "posts of Twitter users about X political event" dataset, it's now impossible for you to ever delete that post, which could be harmful for you in the future. it's unclear whether one type of harm is categorically worse then the other.
The victims of scraping are not going to do any additional work unless the scraped data is used irresponsibly, but that is separate from the act of scraping.
This email required people to do work and caused worry due to the legal threat that the email tried to lead people to believe was applicable to them. They may have had cost if they called a lawyer and it definitely took their time.
Scraping -> no work forced upon victims. That email -> work forced on unwilling victims.
Is there something I’m missing? People including that poster aren’t reaching this same conclusion but it seems very apparent so am I missing something?