I kind of get both sides. They shouldn’t scan personal files at all but then again Dropbox files are also shareable and is kind of like YouTube in that way. So if in this case a guy has copyrighted content, which they own the copyright for, and are sharing copies of copyrighted content, how can an algorithm know it’s not some random person. It’s much more likely not to be the copyright owner than to be it. What’s the worst part imo is that there’s no recourse, no appeal process, no one to talk to for the mistake - except it seems via twitter.

Why shouldn't they be able to know/inspect/scan the content that they are physically storing?

I'm genuinely curious the logic.

From my perspective, they're a company providing a service and can determine the terms upon which they'll provide it. You don't have to use them if you don't like it.

That depends on whether you share the content. In this case, there might be legal requirements for checking on the shared content, so dropbox can't avoid it.

But they might do something about how they handle this. Especially if it's an likely older account. Dropbox has many creators as customers. They should have more experience to handle this gracefully.

How do you know that this had anything to do with inspection or scanning?

There are clearly situations where it's deemed acceptable. Dropbox cooperates with law enforcement to remove illegal images of minors, for instance.