NO: The kicker is that if you did that they'd sue you for breach of contract.
YES: once you passed it off to third parties (in violation of contract) it's not clear how strong of a remedy AggData actually has.
Some of the notions + folk wisdom about copyrightability of facts is based on assumptions that increasingly don't hold.
EG: you can't really copyright the factual contents of the phonebook; if I want to compete with the existing phonebook publisher by retyping the phone book they don't have a copyright claim against me (provided I only transcribe the facts, and organize the information in an obvious or mechanical fashion, like alphabetical ordering).
If you were instead to compete with an existing phone book company by literally xeroxing their product they could probably take you to trial (on a theory that the underlying facts aren't under copyright but the specific page layouts and so on are; there's also the issue of the ads you'd be xeroxing but let's not muddle things overmuch).
If this has already happened and been litigated I've never heard of it.
What something like AggData is doing shows some of the conceptual limits of the existing framework:
- existing physical instantiations of abstract "databases" (collections of fact)
-- (1) couldn't be economically "xeroxed" (EG: if you do it cheaply it is visibly inferior-looking; if you do a very high fidelity reproduction it's about as costly as just re-doing it from scratch)
-- (2) had enough "wiggle room" in how they might be represented in a human-friendly medium such that:
--- (A) on the one hand there's the possibility of a viable copyright claim against a "xeroxer" (under the theory that the page layout is under copyright even if the facts themselves are not)
--- (B) on the other hand allowing for the possibility of "retypers" to actually take advantage of the not-copyrighted status of the underlying facts and actually produce a different product (b/c it is possible to reproduce the same facts with a format sufficiently-different from the source you drew them from)
- but as the "database" becomes increasingly digital
-- (1) "xeroxing" is very economical (far more so than "retyping")
-- (2) there's increasingly less meaningful "wiggle room" as to how the facts might be represented in a "database"; changes-of-format dont' do much, but once the data is shorn of its human-friendly formatting all the useful ways of storing it are essentially isomorphic, meaning (2.B) above is increasingly unlikely (it may no longer be possible to "clone" the abstract data without being too close to the exact format of the source for legal protection).
If someone's actually seen these issues played out or "settled" I'd love to learn more about it.