Probably, because it violates the terms of services of the data access agreement, which I would imagine prohibits the use that was being made because it's the kind of use which discourages people from using the service from which the data is sourced, and it is therefore in the interest of the service provider to officially prohibit the use and to take action to deal with misuse at a minimum when it has become public.

The chilling effect of surveillance has commercial as well as liberty implications, and commercial entities have rather strong reasons to care about the former even if they aren't concerned with the latter.