Its news because both the issue reported and the inability to address this constructively doesn't speak well of them and unlike most landlords they are soliciting outside investment from the kind of people who read hacker news.

Well, they also contend that the "lease" was violated. So there's that. If you continually poke about in doors around the apartment building that the landlord says you're not allowed to, there'a also a good chance you'll be asked to leave the premises.

What "lease"? WeWork is month-to-month.

It's in quotes continuing the analogy. If they violated the TOS, that's akin to violating the lease on your apartment.

The claim is that the tenant violated the WeWork terms of service (very much akin to a lease, albeit a short-term one) by scraping member data through the WeWork API.

Yes, I understand that. I'm going further and saying that anyone working here should expect to lose their spot for any reason or no reason on a monthly --- meaning, effectively, instantaneous --- basis.

I have a lot of negative things to say about WeWork as a business, and some netting-out-positive things to say about the particular West Loop WeWork space I'm working out of right now. But most of all: I'm here with my eyes open. There's also the concern of "is WeWork even going to exist in 6 months"?

Not even monthly they were given 30 minutes to vacate.

Got it - apologies for misunderstanding you. I thought you were suggesting the opposite (I.e. that there is nothing to violate because of the lack of a long-term lease). :)

That's not how it works. Unless he tenant violates one of the terms on the lease where the punishment is explicitly stated to be immediate eviction (e.g. running a drug operation), evicting tenants is a huge liability for the landlord.

Except that's explicitly not allowed.