Sure, but that license doesn't include the requirement to host in perpetuity, and anyway, I wouldn't expect a hobbyist to need to worry about this. If I decide to make my gamer-profile private / offline or something and that breaks your crawler, even though I previously granted unrestricted public access to that data, that's really not my problem.

Let’s not pretend he was hosting the software. Npm was.

No software developer or organisation will use a software repository that allows deletion of packages. That’s why it’s not a thing anymore.

If you think this “right” should exist, that’s a market niche for you to exploit. But you won’t, will you? Because like I said, no user wants this.

??? I didn't say anybody using npm wants this. I'm saying npm had the wrong policy around deletion, that npm could have handled the situation differently, and also that Azer not knowing or caring about the effects of removing the package doesn't make him an asshole or even negligent (although it also doesn't mean he ISNT an asshole; that's a separate matter).

The point is that Azer didn't owe anybody anything; not even to know what he was doing. npm did.

That said, I'm glad the wake-up call came in such a relatively benign way.