as far as any excuse that this is in conformance with any particular rfc, say rfc2616, i would counter that conformance to any rfc is the lowest common denominator to interoperability and not the limiting factor in creating any technical solution. in other words, don't use the rfc as a smokescreen.
Yes, I agree, it's the lowest common denominator, and therefore everyone should follow it. Otherwise, we'll end up with everyone acting like AOL and Microsoft, ignoring standards and demanding special handling to assure compatibility. You can give up the control afforded by the different meanings of 301, and 302 or 307 if you like, but I'd prefer sticking with the specifications any day -- each of those codes means something, and two of them are greatly different.
I don't care who the emperor is or whether he's wearing clothes... I've seen emperors rise and fall before. All I care about is that the current emperor not cause me a bunch of technical grief by changing the terms and conditions under which his robot communicates with my server.