IANAL, but this looks like Meta lawyers trying to shield themselves against partners' suing them, but enough cases like this could help set a precedent that -- yes, you do in fact need a license.
If the licenses say that download is only permitted if you agree not to train on it or similar, then if you have downloaded it, you have agreed to the license, have you not?
I could write "If you don't agree to pay me $100, I reserve the right to block your future access to my comments." (Which is what a ToS is.) But that's not a license agreement.
TOS agreements often have terms concerning things like in which venues disputes about them are to be handled etc., and often have penalties other than the service simply being ended, and if those are valid, then this kind of thing is too.
But in navigating to the page being requested the user may have agreed to something, and that may be a contract.
it's less about getting sued and more about not being blocked from being able to scrape.