[afavour]

I don't see the hypocrisy here. Cobalt is a small, free service that results in Google (or so the argument goes) making less profit. ByteDance are a giant money printing machine using that free service for their own ends. They have more than enough resources to not abuse a free one.

[squeaky-clean]

Let's say hypothetically Cobalt was made by ByteDance as a way to scrape youtube and have a scapegoat. Is it still okay?

If your opinion changes because the owner is different, even though the service stays the same, that's hypocritical.

[afavour]

Of course it isn't hypocritical. It's like the old story of the poor man stealing bread to feed his starving family, of course circumstances matter. It's silly to suggest otherwise.

[squeaky-clean]

Using Cobalt doesn't do anything to feed their family. It's an old poor man stealing a blu-ray DVD vs a rich young man stealing a blu-ray DVD.