[IanCal]

> If you remove the editorializing, I don't see a bit of difference between "moviepass says you can see all the films (but if everyone did they would go broke, and they did go broke, leading to loss of service for everyone)" and "financial company says you can send money for free (and if everyone did they would lose money)" which is what the op did.

The financial company didn't run a website saying "want to be paid thousands? Move money back and forth repeatedly with our services!".

> On a more meta level, I am concerned about an ethical view where different ethical rules apply if different actors are involved.

Different actors are different so I don't see why that's a concern. Different intent is also surely not an odd addition here? It's foundational in so many legal systems even.