[HN Gopher] Trolley.co.uk is shutting down - pricing data is app...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Trolley.co.uk is shutting down - pricing data is apparently owned
       by a company
        
       Author : zikohh
       Score  : 36 points
       Date   : 2022-06-27 20:26 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.trolley.co.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.trolley.co.uk)
        
       | technick wrote:
       | Setup a shell company in Bermuda that does the scrapping for you
       | and then claim you buy the data from them. When they approach you
       | just tell them you have a NDA and can't disclose the company.
       | That'll keep them at bay for awhile... then when you're forced to
       | disclose, they'll spend the rest of their time chasing a shell
       | company in Bermuda.
       | 
       | OR.....
       | 
       | Just create a firefox extension that scrapes the pages for your
       | users.
       | 
       | There's many ways to keep this going while giving them the middle
       | finger and serving your users.
        
       | Komodai wrote:
       | Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me... Aren't there tons of
       | companies like Trolley that scrape data, etc. without issues?
       | 
       | Like, I assume these do: PriceSpy, PriceRunner, PrisJakt,
       | Shopping.com, PriceGrabber, etc.
        
         | sslalready wrote:
         | A lot of E-commerce software have data feeds that are ingested
         | by parties like pricespy. These feeds are typically either
         | public or made available after mutual agreements. Scraping a
         | large amount of sites for data is just too much labor in the
         | long run.
        
       | verve_rat wrote:
       | You can't copyright a list of facts. I'm confused about what they
       | have run in to? Maybe they should take some of the money they
       | have raised and talk to a lawyer.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | The cease & desist mentions Asda [1] and [2] says "Asda chose
         | NielsenIQ Brandbank, their existing digital content provider
         | for 13 years"
         | 
         | So I'd wager the C&D came from Brandbank - who presumably
         | supply product photos and product data (barcode, pack size, and
         | all the other data like nutritional information you'd find on
         | the packet if you were browsing in store)
         | 
         | [1] https://www.trolley.co.uk/imgs/cease-and-desist-letter.png
         | [2] https://www.brandbank.com/asda-accelerates-their-rich-
         | conten...
        
         | esjeon wrote:
         | You can if you _curate_ the list. Curating requires collecting
         | and processing information, which often can be expensive.
        
         | sdflhasjd wrote:
         | Yes, I could understand (if not also somewhat disagree) with it
         | regarding photos, but "and data"? What does that entail?
        
       | arcza wrote:
       | Seems very off and unsustainable (e.g. what happens in 2023 is
       | unclear), along with hiding the licensor's name - that seems
       | unreasonable. Who is the end recipient of this donation? I don't
       | buy the story.
        
       | goldcd wrote:
       | I'm also slightly confused.
       | 
       | If they were scraping the information/pictures off the
       | supermarket sites, then I'd have expected the cease and desist to
       | come from the supermarkets.
       | 
       | Given that the letter came from "a company" then I presume they
       | were taking their information from an aggregator - and seems
       | entirely fair that you should "pay the aggregator" (as there's
       | clearly a company out there doing something similar to what
       | they're doing - but they were taking their data).
       | 
       | If this company was just a data-hose, then I'd have thought you
       | could monetize your consumer-focussed product, simply by flogging
       | anonymized data from your users back to the supermarkets.
       | "Customer X, dropped product Y from their weekly basket (or
       | swapped supermarket), when you raised the price of Z (or other
       | supermarket dropped it)"
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | mytailorisrich wrote:
       | The whole thing smells fishy.
       | 
       | While pictures would be under copyright (and it's possible
       | copyright is with a third party specialised in this), I can't see
       | how the price listed for a product on, say, Tesco's website and
       | collected by yourself on Tesco's website could be subject to
       | licensing by a third party, even considering database rights.
       | 
       | I am also puzzled by those guys claim that they got a very
       | "generous offer" from that company.
       | 
       | If they are unsure a better first step would be to crowdfund
       | legal advice.
       | 
       | They could then crowdsource taking pictures of all the products
       | from their users.
        
         | Arnavion wrote:
         | Well it seems they're _not_ scraping Tesco 's website but some
         | aggregator middleman. Like making a package tracking website
         | using Parcels instead of FedEx, UPS, etc individually. Sure
         | it's convenient to write code that only scrapes one website,
         | but now that website is mad because it has a business selling
         | that data.
        
         | Closi wrote:
         | Unless there is a third party which is taking photos of all
         | grocery products and then licensing that to the supermarkets,
         | to avoid them all having to take their own photos?
         | 
         | I used to work for one of the major supermarkets and am aware
         | that there are providers of product images, but don't know the
         | specifics in enough detail.
        
           | mr_toad wrote:
           | Taking a photo only gives you copyright over that photo, it
           | doesn't stop other people taking a similar photo.
           | 
           | A lot of business try and claim copyright of a subject (like
           | a tourist attraction) and try and prevent photography of it,
           | but that's legal BS in any jurisdiction I've heard of.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | Right, but if you're making a price-comparison website with
             | scraped data, you can't scrape the product image from a
             | supermarket website legally.
             | 
             | You could of course get images from some other source - but
             | you need meticulous organisation when a single brand of tea
             | might have 40, 80, 160, 240 and 600 bag packages.
        
               | Closi wrote:
               | This assumes that the supermarket took the photos - what
               | I mean is the supermarket might buy those product photos
               | under license.
        
             | Closi wrote:
             | No, I mean they take the actual photographs and then
             | license them to the retailers. Plus they can also capture
             | other product data in a consistent format etc.
             | 
             | See here as an example: https://www.brandbank.com/content-
             | licensing/
             | 
             | So for instance you could scrape a website that licenced
             | images from brandbank above, and then fall foul of their
             | copyright.
             | 
             | Brandbank as an example does work with UK supermarkets,
             | e.g. see below:
             | 
             | https://www.brandbank.com/tag/sainsburys/
             | https://www.brandbank.com/tesco-case-study/
        
       | matt321 wrote:
       | can publicly available data be the property of someone?
        
         | mtmail wrote:
         | It seems to be related to the product images, or the images
         | were easiest to identify and fight over
         | https://www.trolley.co.uk/imgs/cease-and-desist-letter.png
         | While a product name, price could be public (a person can see
         | it in a store), the picture is very specific and trolley didn't
         | take the pictures.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | It seems they could also just cease use of the 'offending'
           | informationa nd use generic imagery or descriptions instead.
           | For bandwidth/processing reasons, I'd prefer as much text and
           | as few graphics as possible anyway.
        
             | sdflhasjd wrote:
             | Unfortunately, supermarket products would be difficult to
             | distinguish without imagery.
        
               | itake wrote:
               | even then, why does it cost 28k PER YEAR, for photos of
               | product images? Can't you just spend a week in a market
               | taking product photos yourself?
        
         | bpicolo wrote:
         | Depends on your country / jurisdiction
        
       | lapser wrote:
       | As others have said, it seems fishy.
       | 
       | They've got this data from somewhere, so why wouldn't they have
       | looked through the license before using it?
       | 
       | Anyway, speaking of MySupermarket, what happened to them? All I
       | know was one day they decided to shut down, without clear
       | reasons. Does anyone have more insight into why it happened?
        
         | Komodai wrote:
         | They got it from web scraping, doesn't exactly have a license I
         | guess...?
        
         | notahacker wrote:
         | Yeah, I'm scratching my head at this. On the one hand, the UK
         | does have some weird database trolls (a copyright troll called
         | FootballDataCo claimed licence fees from anybody publishing
         | football fixture lists irrespective of where they sourced the
         | information from, and probably can do again since the EU court
         | judgement against them presumably no longer applies)
         | 
         | On the other hand it makes no sense to accompany a supposed
         | order to c&d screen scraping of multiple (independently
         | maintained) websites with thanks for their generosity and "this
         | company is absolutely entitled to request compensation for
         | their work". Either they're a valuable data provider or an
         | licensing obstacle to using perfectly adequate screen scraping
         | techniques, not both. Not sure why a price comparison website
         | would screen scrape the supermarkets with APIs either...
        
       | mr_gibbins wrote:
       | It looks like a startup that's hit a brick wall viz a viz
       | licensing pictures.
       | 
       | One way of getting around this, albeit perhaps at the expense of
       | user experience, is to insert stock photos. E.g. I imagine
       | 'carrots' is not particularly unique. Where stock photos can't be
       | used, i.e. it's a specialist/one-off product, perhaps the classic
       | white-box-black-text approach?
       | 
       | If this is a genuine site with good intentions, staffed by
       | volunteers then it would be a shame to see it stamped down by the
       | supermarkets.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-27 23:00 UTC)