I didn't say it does not exist, I said it does not work as a justification for actions that infringe on rights.

Sure, especially when we’re talking about rights that are almost universally agreed upon. But it could be a good justification for something like “the right to talk to customer support for Candy Crush”. The OP didn’t specify which companies he was trying to contact.

It was the originator of this thread (endsleigh) who framed the issue in terms of rights and their value. I am pointing out that this is not a useful way to look at it.

Here, you are asking, in effect, whether a Candy Crush player has any such right in the first place, and I think it is completely reasonable to say they do not in such trivial matters. As I mentioned in my original post, I am mainly concerned with third parties, several of whom have shown up in the broader discussion, but customers and ex-customers could have reasonable issues with retroactive policy changes to issues such as privacy.