Apple shuts down Web-based product inventory tracking tool
A website that scraped data from Apple in order to let users know what iPad Air models were in stock near them has been shut down by the company via a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notice.
Developer Mordy Tikotzky posted an update on Wednesday to his website Apple-Tracker, revealing that he decided to shut down the site after receiving the DMCA notice from Apple.
"I'm not really interested in picking a fight with apple so..... I guess it time to just say good bye," he wrote. "Before I go I just wanted to say thanks to all of you for the nice comments and emails that you've sent in the last few days. It was fun while it lasted."
Apple's takedown notice is posted on the site and was actually dated Oct. 17?-- weeks before the iPad Air went on sale. The letter, sent by the law firm Kilpatrick, Townsend and Stockton LLP, accuses the site of having used "page-scrape" tools to "access, acquire, copy or monitor" data from Apple's website.
Prior to its shutdown, the tool gained interest last Friday as a means for shoppers to determine which new iPad Air units were in stock at their nearest Apple Store locations. Data at the time showed that the high-end 128-gigabyte model was in limited supply, while 16-gigabyte Wi-Fi-only versions in space grey were readily available.
The tool worked by compiling and reformatting data pulled in from Apple's official online store. The data represented information limited to in-store pickup purchases only, and did not necessarily reflect the stock on hand.
The website also had trackers for the iPhone 5s, and Tikotzky had said hew as readying the tool to be able to handle Apple's forthcoming second-generation iPad mini with Retina display. But with this week's shutdown, users will now be required to check Apple's website directly.
Developer Mordy Tikotzky posted an update on Wednesday to his website Apple-Tracker, revealing that he decided to shut down the site after receiving the DMCA notice from Apple.
"I'm not really interested in picking a fight with apple so..... I guess it time to just say good bye," he wrote. "Before I go I just wanted to say thanks to all of you for the nice comments and emails that you've sent in the last few days. It was fun while it lasted."
Apple's takedown notice is posted on the site and was actually dated Oct. 17?-- weeks before the iPad Air went on sale. The letter, sent by the law firm Kilpatrick, Townsend and Stockton LLP, accuses the site of having used "page-scrape" tools to "access, acquire, copy or monitor" data from Apple's website.
Prior to its shutdown, the tool gained interest last Friday as a means for shoppers to determine which new iPad Air units were in stock at their nearest Apple Store locations. Data at the time showed that the high-end 128-gigabyte model was in limited supply, while 16-gigabyte Wi-Fi-only versions in space grey were readily available.
The tool worked by compiling and reformatting data pulled in from Apple's official online store. The data represented information limited to in-store pickup purchases only, and did not necessarily reflect the stock on hand.
The website also had trackers for the iPhone 5s, and Tikotzky had said hew as readying the tool to be able to handle Apple's forthcoming second-generation iPad mini with Retina display. But with this week's shutdown, users will now be required to check Apple's website directly.
Comments
That's a shame.
How?
My guess is they don't want people seeing just how few iPad mini retina's they have in stock when they hit the stores. That would be fodder for the competition.
Damn it, I loved that site
I can't say I know every provision in the DMCA, but this site was copying factual information, which is not protected by copyright law under Feist. Wish he would have tested the law in court, but I know why he didn't
Agreed, Apple seems to have improperly using the DMCA takedown provisions. He should have got somebody involved like the EFF, and he probably would have prevailed.
What competition? ;-)
They had to "make an example" so nobody else would follow his and start scraping apple.com for more potentially injurious reasons.
Same reason lawyers made Sunbeam put "remove clothing from body before ironing" on their box containing steam irons.
https://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1308133
If you see "The item you requested does not exist or is not publicly available." please check back later.
Yes. This is the real reason. They just can't allow scraping.
Inventory counts aren't the same kind of 'factual' as say obama's birthdate. Plus the DMCA also deals in issues of how the information is gathered. He used code he didn't have permission to use to create his site, which was likely the issue that got the order issued.
Like it or not folks, Apple's not legally required to provide the data in this kind of form and just because they don't doesn't mean, legally, anyone that does gets a pass. He should be happy it was a DMCA order and he wasn't hit with the whole Computer Fraud Act by some fame seeking federal lawyer.
The legality of website scraping is sort of a gray area. It's not worth his time/money to try and take this up the court chain. Also, I don't see this as a malicious threat by apple as much as them protecting their data from malicious use in the future.
The problem is not that Apple asked the Site to be taken down, it is that it used the Digital Milliuem Copyright Act to do it. Apple does not hold a copyright in data. Consequently, Apple's use of invoking the DMCA was improper. If the Site was damaging Apple in another way (eg showing improper data), than Apple could have used another legal theory to have its data removed. For example, Trademark infringement.
Inventory counts aren't the same kind of 'factual' as say obama's birthdate. Plus the DMCA also deals in issues of how the information is gathered. He used code he didn't have permission to use to create his site, which was likely the issue that got the order issued.
Like it or not folks, Apple's not legally required to provide the data in this kind of form and just because they don't doesn't mean, legally, anyone that does gets a pass. He should be happy it was a DMCA order and he wasn't hit with the whole Computer Fraud Act by some fame seeking federal lawyer.
There was no order issued, which would imply a Court was involved. Apple used the DMCA's take down provisions to issue a demand letter to ask the Site to be taken down. Apple does not hold a copyright in its inventory data, so a DMCA takedown notice was likely improper. Big companies all the time use the DMCA take down notice provisions improperly because they generally get away with it.
The problem is not that Apple asked the Site to be taken down, it is that it used the Digital Milliuem Copyright Act to do it. Apple does not hold a copyright in data. Consequently, Apple's use of invoking the DMCA was improper. If the Site was damaging Apple in another way (eg showing improper data), than Apple could have used another legal theory to have its data removed. For example, Trademark infringement.
Read the full text of the letter that Apple sent do this guy (at http://www.apple-tracker.com/). Although apparently the DMCA provides some guidance about how to do this, the complaint is strictly a standard "you have violate our terms of use of our web site, so stop" complaint. They could (and would) have sent exactly the same letter even if the MDCA didn't exist. This is no different from a hypothical case where put a robots.txt file on your site saying that Google isn't allowed to spider your pages and they do anyway. Apple is completely within their rights to limit uses of their Web site to purposes they approve.