-ish. A lot of legal issues are heavily based on the particular circumstances, so a general statement like "scraping is legal" summarizing the results of hiQ v LinkedIn is a gross oversimplification of the actual findings of said case.

In general, the cases where scraping has been found to be legal have largely turned on the basis of things like accessing the public parts of the website and attempting to minimize potential copyright violation. Here, these services are bypassing a login requirement and reproducing the scraped data in full--actions that have generally led to findings of illegality in the past.

It's not a slam-dunk case in either direction, and I think the result would come down more to the quality of the lawyers to craft their arguments. And SpaceX has the cash right now to afford the better lawyers.