Re-posting here as mod's deleted my post due to many discussion going on:

First of all, I would like to say I think it’s great for Riot to get involved; with even the CEO’s talking to us on a personal level. But I also think it’s important to keep a neutral, cool levelled head and avoid being slanderous for the sake of seemingly trying to prioritise a “VIP” interests over anyone else.

This is barely an issue of “privacy” and more of a matter of monetary interest, let’s not try sugar coat it as something else. Even Travis making a video wasn’t just to “raise an important issue to the community”, it’s creating content off a hot topic and milking the community a little bit more as he has done with almost every new hot-topic to reach this sub.

On a similar topic, in what way do people making videos, blogs and so on, commenting /criticising the actions of various parties give any level of privacy? Did Travis seek prior consent to all parties beforehand? Or is “journalism” ok to violate player’s wishes to be talked about (or not get royalties)? How is this any different?

What I find confusing (in the somewhat, “are you delusion?” way) is that SpectateFaker is “e-stalking”, but Riot granting no means of privacy from spectator to friends, or even the featured games on the landing page for years is of course not stalking despite numerous request since launch, including the chat system for such privacy?

Ironically, as a player who has experienced issues with other players spectating me and looking at my match history to see whom I’ve played with in the past, a large portion of Riot’s own game is heavily based around “e-stalking” – everyone can publically see what I’ve done and I have no option of privacy, yet Riot puts this all on a plate fully knowing professional players are the most “stalked” players in the community? Yet this is acceptable?

But what monetary interest does a player match history have? Very little that they can monopolise on and certainly not one they used to monopolise on, and therefore have an expectation of ownership. Streaming however has been very niche and expensive, but it is now becoming more and more popular, common and less expensive.

The sole problem with all this is fear of losing out monetarily. Had spectateFaker made a client /spectator that worked for all devices and where it was feasible to spectator any player, the topic would have took a much different and awkward one for Riot.

Do something more viable and apparently it is loophole making, stalking and everything else because it utilizes the same, popular technology that professional players rely on?

There’s a conflict of interest, and that is that the most viable option (streaming a game in video format) is taking a path where the game isn’t monopolised by the player any more.

Player’s streams should have some sort of added value (player camera, commentary /viewer interaction and so on) and definitely not be just about spectating their game.

Why should we line their pockets just to broadcast spectator? There is no added value over Riot’s system here, their streams should have an added value – that is what I expect when I hear about “players stream”. If they are not entertaining or for those who would rather just spectate them, why is this such an issue?

We can’t say SpectateFaker is immoral or estalking, not unless lolking, Riot, op.gg and the rest are immoral stalkers too? It’s not even an issue, other than a few ego’s being burnt. Riot system is based on a "spectate anyone" with "no expectations of privacy"