No one in the US can hold copyrights to the pure 'facts', especially if one demonstrates they invested enough energy to 'creatively reinterpret' it. Scraping hasn't quite seen a Supreme Court ruling yet (@grellas correct me, please), but I'm sure one could make a reasonable argument that the energy invested in re-collating the data is sufficient enough to pass any barrier. See Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co, 1991. and O'Connors opinion.