I'm not saying that anyone should be banned from doing anything. I am just saying that the information is not hard to correlate.
People who are concerned about their address privacy will often put their home in the ownership of trust or a corporation. That data, despite being regularly collected, is exploitable, and is often exploited. I'm not saying this should be legally changed, but pointing out that it is reasonable to bring up the concern.
> I'm not saying that anyone should be banned from doing anything.
Your characterization of it as a "privacy abuse" suggests otherwise. Moreover, my argument is that most people wouldn't call a mapping of street numbers to gps coordinates a privacy abuse, so it would be absurd to call a mapping of BSSIDs to gps coordinates a privacy abuse as well since they're both pretty similar.
Data collection is not automatically abuse, but it can facilitate abuse, and some distributors of that data (i.e. data brokers) and often complacent in that abuse.
Abuse is all about what someone does with the data.
I probably would have been more clear if I had said "potential privacy abuses" above. Any time this data is given/sold to third parties without any legal framework for protecting it, it is ripe for potential abuse.
People who are concerned about their address privacy will often put their home in the ownership of trust or a corporation. That data, despite being regularly collected, is exploitable, and is often exploited. I'm not saying this should be legally changed, but pointing out that it is reasonable to bring up the concern.