UK National Rail Threatens App Maker For Even Discussing His Train Time App
from the it's-better-if-people-don't-know-the-train-times dept
National Rail, in the UK, seems particularly short-sighted about this, and now they're taking it even further, threatening people for even talking about their threats. Glyn Moody points us to the news that a developer, Alex Hewson, who had created a web (not mobile) app that used National Rail's open API, which was even listed in the government-run list of open data feeds that developers are encouraged to make use of, who was first told to shut down the app (a year after it had been running). The backstory here is even more ridiculous. Even with the open API, Hewson sent a note to the National Rail asking if it was okay if he turned his web app into an Android app -- and charged enough to cover the costs of development. At first he received no response, so he sent another letter, and finally got this response:
"I can confirm the National Rail Enquiries Website is for personal and non-commercial use only. Therefore, the suggestion made in your letter, to utilise the data to build an Android application is expressly prohibited. I'm sorry that we cannot be of any further assistance."Based on that he killed the Android app idea -- even though the response is a bit odd, as it implies that any Android app is automatically a "commercial use." Either way, apparently National Rail is now working to lock up the API, and quietly put up a note saying that to use it, you would soon need to use "tokens" which you could only get with a license. Hewson only discovered this after a friend pointed it out, so Hewson sent a friendly note to National Rail asking for a token, noting that his app was purely non-commercial. He also asked if there was some mailing list he could sign up for, so he wouldn't be surprised by such things.
Instead, he got a demand that he immediately shut down his app, and a haughty claim that "there has always been a requirement for a license to use this service." Of course, as Hewson pointed out, that contradicted what the National Rail had told him earlier. The author of the note, Derek Parlour, also noted that it was "highly likely" any license would require a fee. Of course, that seems strange. That's because in response to an article from Wired criticizing National Rail's refusal to open up its data, National Rail's chief executive, Chris Scoggins, scolded Wired saying:
It isn't true that National Rail Enquiries (NRE) refuses to open up its data feeds.... We've opened up our data to a range of organisations, often free of charge, so they can provide information about trains.That seems to to contradict Parlour's comments. That led to Hewson trying to reach Scoggins via a comment on Scoggins blog. Scoggins replied -- not by admitting to a mistake, or by fixing things and allowing this app which (again, must we remind everyone?) makes it more convenient for people to take the train, but by threatening Hewson for publishing Derek Parlour's original email, claiming that it was "confidential."
So, not only can you not use the "open" API (that Scoggins himself claims is open, despite it not being so), you also can't even discuss the contradictory and misleading statements made by National Rail employees. Hewson admits that there was a confidentiality statement on the email, but just like in another recent story about someone in the UK relying too much on a poorly written confidentiality notice, the National Rail's confidentiality notice only says you can't share it if you're not the intended recipient. Since he was the intended recipient, the confidentiality policy clearly states he is free to share it.
As it stands, it sounds like Hewson may be giving up on the app. He can't even get a direct answer to the simple question of whether or not he needs to shut down the existing app (which, yes, I'll say it again, is being used to help more people use the train) while they discuss any kind of licensing deal. No matter how you look at this, National Rail appears to be making a series of really ridiculously bad moves here. Not opening up the data is just the first mistake. Then trying to abuse confidentiality policies, along with having inconsistent overall policies, just makes the entire operation seem like a mess.