Nuisance for societal gain can certainly be respectable and arguably an overall good; look at Edward Snowden for example.

But that also supports the original point: he was a nuisance to the US government and they are doing everything they can within the limit of the law (and politics) to get their hands on him. Lucky for him Russia is going through an angsty phase and is granting him asylum for the moment.

In this particular case of scraping and publishing the churn rate, no one really benefits. It was just one person/startup who felt like starting drama and didn't bother thinking about the consequences.

Leave the drama to the TV networks and tabloids.

Nobody benefits. Except WeWork's now better-informed customers and investors. Who seem like somebody to me.

WeWork's customers don't really have any right to know its internal sales data and operating figures. And obviously the investors have access to better numbers than whatever this guy managed to find and scrape from their API.

The question if customers have any rights to know the figures is different from the question if the figures are useful to them.

The comment was about societal gain. Large companies often gather substantial intelligence on suppliers, so clearly there's a benefit.

Investors don't obviously have access to better numbers. Investors in privately held companies generally receive a very carefully groomed set of data. We hope the people compiling that information don't go out of their way to hide anything (although that happens). And we hope that the raw data is accurate (although this too is often distorted). But they probably don't go out of their way to dig up negative stuff. Smart investors definitely don't take a company's offered financials as their only source of information.

And WeWork intends to go public, possibly soon. Those people definitely don't have access to better numbers right now. And they might not get any. IPOs are carefully stage managed.