[jjeaff]

Those examples don't fit because they are contracts not made in good faith. They aren't things you can control.

In this case, it was rules that the public data is available. It was a good faith contract on the part of HiQ to assume they could collect public data from a public website.

It would not be a good faith contract to assume you could control the paint colors on a property you don't own.

It seems to me that the interference ruling was wholly independent on deciding that what hiq was doing is legal.