Friday, 29 July 2016

Best Alternative For Linkedin Data Scraping

Best Alternative For Linkedin Data Scraping

When I started my career in sales, one of the things that my VP of sales told me is that ” In sales, assumptions are the mother of all f**k ups “. I know the F word sounds a bit inappropriate, but that is the exact word he used. He was trying to convey the simple point that every prospect is different, so don’t guess, use data to come up with decisions.

I joined Datahut and we are working on a product that helps sales people. I thought I should discuss it with you guys and take your feedback.

Let me tell you how the idea evolved itself. At Datahut, we get to hear a lot of problems customers want to solve. Almost 30 percent of all the inbound leads ask us to help them with lead generation.

Most of them simply ask, “Can you scrape Linkedin for me”?

Every time, we politely refused.

But not anymore, we figured out a way to solve their problem without scraping Linkedin.

This should raise some questions in your mind.

1) What problem is he trying to solve?– Most of the time their sales team does not have the accurate data about the prospects. This leads to a total chaos. It will end up in a waste of both time and money by selling the leads that are not sales qualified.

2) Why do they need data specifically from Linkedin? – LinkedIn is the world’s largest business network. In his view, there is no better place to find leads for his business than Linkedin. It is right in a way.

3) Ok, then what is wrong in scraping Linkedin? – Scraping Linkedin is against its terms and it can lead to legal issues. Linkedin has an excellent anti-scraping mechanism which can make the scraping costly.

4) How severe is the problem? – The problem has a direct impact on the revenues as the productivity of the sales team is too low. Without enough sales, the company is a joke.

5) Is there a better way? – Of course yes. The people with profiles in LinkedIn are in other sites too. eg. Google plus, CrunchBase etc. If we can mine and correlate the data, we can generate leads with rich information. It will have better quality than scraping LinkedIn.

6) What to do when the machine intelligence fails? – We have to use human intelligence. Period!

Datahut is working on a platform that can help you get leads that match your ideal buyer persona. It will be a complete Business intelligence platform powered by machine and human intelligence for an efficient lead research & discovery.We named it Leadintel. We’ve also established some partnerships that help to enrich the data and saves the trouble of lawsuits.

We are opening our platform for beta users. You can request an invitation using the contact form. What do you think about this? What are your suggestions?

Thanks for reading this blog post. Datahut offers affordable data extraction services (DaaS) . If you need help with your web scraping projects let us know and we will be glad to help.

Source:http://blog.datahut.co/best-alternative-for-linkedin-data-scraping/

Tuesday, 12 July 2016

Content Scrapers – How to Find Out Who is Stealing Your Content & What to Do About It

If you have been blogging for a while, chances are you are familiar with content scrapers. Content scrapers are websites that steal your content for their own blogs without your permission. Some content scrapers will just copy the content off of your blog, but most use automated software that takes the content from your RSS feed and posts your content to their site like it is a new post.

In this post, we are going to look at some potential link building benefits to content scrapers, how to find out what sites are scraping your content, and what you can do if you want to either benefit from the linking standpoint or have them take it down.

Linking Benefits of Content Scrapers

Last week, I was happy to see that I was listed in ProBlogger’s 20 Bloggers to Watch in 2012. Within 24 hours, I received a notification in my WordPress dashboard that a page on my blog had been linked to in the post on ProBlogger’s site.

After receiving the original notification from the ProBlogger post, I also received another 18 trackbacks from sites that had stolen the content in their post verbatim. Trackbacks are WordPress’ way of letting you know that another website has linked to a post on your blog. In this case, these 18 sites had posted the content exactly like the original post – with the links back to my blog still intact.

It was then that I started contemplating the potential link building benefits of content scrapers. These are not by any means quality links – the highest Google PageRank was a PR 2 domain, many were stealing content in a variety of languages, and one even had the nerve to use some kind of redirection script to take away the link juice of outgoing links! So while these links didn’t have the same authority that the original post had, they still count as links.

How to Catch Content Scrapers

Unfortunately, unless you want to continuously search for your post titles in Google, you’ll only be able to easily track down sites that keep your in-content links active. If you want to know what websites are scraping your content, here are a few tips to sniff them out.

Copyscape

Copyscape is a simple search engine that allows you to enter the URL of your content to find out if there are duplicates of it on the Internet. You can get a few results using their free search, or you can pay for a premium account to check up to 10,000 pages on your site and more.

Trackbacks

The first way is through your trackbacks in WordPress (as shown in the image above). Many of these will show up in the spam folder if you use Akismet. The key to getting trackbacks to appear from content scrapers is to always include links to other posts in your content. Be sure those links have great anchor text too, if you’re going for a little extra link juice. And even if you are not, internal linking with strong anchor text is good for your on-site optimization too!

Anyone thinking about link building benefits at this point is probably noting the sheer volume of links from these sites, some of which are content scrapers. Essentially any site that is linking to a lot of your posts that isn’t a social network, social bookmarking site, or a die-hard fan who just loves linking to you is potentially a content scraper. You’ll have to go to their website to be sure. To find your links on their site, click on one of the domains to see the details of what pages on your site they are linking to specifically.

You can see here that they are just blatantly copying my posts titles. When I visited one of the links, sure enough, they are copying my entire posts in their full glory onto their site.

Google Alerts

If you don’t post often or want to keep up with any mentions of your top blog posts on other websites, you can create a Google Alert using the exact match for your post’s title by putting the title in quotation marks.

I deliver all of my Google Alerts to an RSS feed so I can manage them in Google Reader, but you can also have them delivered regularly by email. You’ll even get an instant preview of the types of results you will get.

How to Get Credit for Scraped Posts

If you use WordPress, then you definitely want to try out the RSS footer plugin. This plugin allows you to place a custom piece of text at the top or bottom of your RSS feed content.
As you can see, even if you aren’t using it for the purpose of getting credit back to your posts when content thieves steal it, you can still use it for a little extra bit of advertising with the possible benefit of people who subscribe to your RSS feed clicking through to your website or social profiles. And when someone does scrape your content from your RSS feed, it shows up there too

So in the event that someone finds your scraped content, they will hopefully notice the credit before assuming it was created by the blog that stole it. If you don’t have WordPress, you can simply include a note at the top or bottom of your content that includes the same information.

How to Stop Content Scrapers

If you’re not interested in anyone copying your content, then you have a few options to choose from. You can start by contacting the site that is stealing your content and sending them a notice that you want all of your content removed immediately. You can do this through the site’s contact form, email address, or post it to any social accounts they list.

If there is no contact information on the website stealing your content, you can do a Whois Lookup to (hopefully) find out who owns the domain.

If it is not privately registered, you should find an administrative contact’s email address. If not, you should at least see the domain registrar which, in this case, is GoDaddy and/or the hosting company for the website which, in this case, is HostGator. You can try to contact both companies (HostGator has a DMCA form and GoDaddy has an email) and let them know that the domain in question is stealing copyrighted content in hopes that the website will be suspended or removed.

You can also visit the DMCA and use their takedown services to remove anyone who is copying your photos, video, audio, blog, or other content. They even offer a WordPress plugin to incorporate a DMCA protected badge on your site to warn potential thieves.

Have you ever dealt with content scrapers and thieves? Do you leave it alone for the link benefits, or do you fight back? What other tools, services, or other preventative tactics do you use to block content scrapers? Please share your thoughts and experiences in the comments!

Source URL : https://blog.kissmetrics.com/content-scrapers/

Saturday, 9 July 2016

Web Data Scraping: Practical Uses

Whether in the form of media, text or data in diverse other formats—the internet serves to be a huge storehouse of the world’s information. While browsing for commercial or business needs alike, users are exposed to numerous web pages that contain data in just about every form. Even though access to such data is extremely critical for garnering success in the contemporary world, unfortunately most of it is not open. More often than not, business websites restrict the accessibility options to such data and do not allow visitors to save or display them for reuse on their local storage devices, or onto their own websites.  This is where web data extraction tools come in handy.

Read on for a closer look into some of the common areas of data scraping usage.

• Gathering of data from diverse sources for analysis: In case a business necessitates the collection and analysis of data specific to certain categories from multiple websites, then it helps refer to web data integration experts or those related to the field of data scraping linked with categories like industrial equipment, real estate, automobiles, marketing, business contacts, electronic gadgets and so forth.

• Collection of data in different formats: Different websites are known to publish information and structured data in different formats. So, it may not be possible for organizations to see all the required data a one place, at any given time. Data scrapers allow the extraction of information spanning across multiple pages under various sections, on to a single database or spreadsheet.  This makes it easy for users to analyze (or visualize) the data.

• Helps Research: Data is an important and integral part of all kinds of research – marketing, academic or scientific. A data scraper helps in gathering structured data with ease.

• Market analysis for businesses: Companies that cater to products or services connected to specific domains require comprehensive data of products and services that are of similar kind, and which have a tendency of appearing in the market on a daily basis.

Web scraping software solutions from reputed companies are successful in keeping a constant watch on this kind of data and allow users to get access required information from diverse sources – all at the click of a button.

Go for data extraction to take your business to the next levels of success – you will not be disappointed.

Source URL : http://www.3idatascraping.com/web-data-scraping-practical-uses.php

Friday, 8 July 2016

ECJ clarifies Database Directive scope in screen scraping case

EC on the legal protection of databases (Database Directive) in a case concerning the extraction of data from a third party’s website by means of automated systems or software for commercial purposes (so called 'screen scraping').

Flight data extracted

The case, Ryanair Ltd vs. PR Aviation BV, C-30/14, is of interest to a range of companies such as price comparison websites. It stemmed from  Dutch company PR Aviation operation of a website where consumers can search through flight data of low-cost airlines  (including Ryanair), compare prices and, on payment of a commission, book a flight. The relevant flight data is extracted from third-parties’ websites by means of ‘screen scraping’ practices.

Ryanair claimed that PR Aviation’s activity:

• amounted to infringement of copyright (relating to the structure and architecture of the database) and of the so-called sui generis database right (i.e. the right granted to the ‘maker’ of the database where certain investments have been made to obtain, verify, or present the contents of a database) under the Netherlands law implementing the Database Directive;

• constituted breach of contract. In this respect, Ryanair claimed that a contract existed with PR Aviation for the use of its website. Access to the latter requires acceptance, by clicking a box, of the airline’s general terms and conditions which, amongst others, prohibit unauthorized ‘screen scraping’ practices for commercial purposes.

Ryanair asked Dutch courts to prohibit the infringement and order damages. In recent years the company has been engaged in several legal cases against web scrapers across Europe.

The Local Court, Utrecht, and the Court of Appeals of Amsterdam dismissed Ryanair’s claims on different grounds. The Court of Appeals, in particular, cited PR Aviation’s screen scraping of Ryanair’s website as amounting to a “normal use” of said website within the meaning of the lawful user exceptions under Sections 6 and 8 of the Database Directive, which cannot be derogated by contract (Section 15).

Ryanair appealed

Ryanair appealed the decision before the Netherlands Supreme Court (Hoge Raad der Nederlanden), which decided to refer the following question to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling: “Does the application of [Directive 96/9] also extend to online databases which are not protected by copyright on the basis of Chapter II of said directive or by a sui generis right on the basis of Chapter III, in the sense that the freedom to use such databases through the (whether or not analogous) application of Article[s] 6(1) and 8, in conjunction with Article 15 [of Directive 96/9] may not be limited contractually?.”

The ECJ’s ruling

The ECJ (without the need of the opinion of the advocate general) ruled that the Database Directive is not applicable to databases which are not protected either by copyright or by the sui generis database right. Therefore, exceptions to restricted acts set forth by Sections 6 and 8 of the Directive do not prevent the database owner from establishing contractual limitations on its use by third parties. In other words, restrictions to the freedom to contract set forth by the Database Directive do not apply in cases of unprotected databases. Whether Ryanair’s website may be entitled to copyright or sui generis database right protection needs to be determined by the competent national court.

The ECJ’s decision is not particularly striking from a legal standpoint. Yet, it could have a significant impact on the business model of price comparison websites, aggregators, and similar businesses. Owners of databases that could not rely on intellectual property protection may contractually prevent extraction and use (“scraping”) of content from their online databases. Thus, unprotected databases could receive greater protection than the one granted by IP law.

Antitrust implications

However, the lawfulness of contractual restrictions prohibiting access and reuse of data through screen scraping practices should be assessed under an antitrust perspective. In this respect, in 2013 the Court of Milan ruled that Ryanair’s refusal to grant access to its database to the online travel agency Viaggiare S.r.l. amounted to an abuse of dominant position in the downstream market of information and intermediation on flights (decision of June 4, 2013 Viaggiare S.r.l. vs Ryanair Ltd). Indeed, a balance should be struck between the need to compensate the efforts and investments made by the creator of the database with the interest of third parties to be granted with access to information (especially in those cases where the latter are not entitled to copyright protection).

Additionally, web scraping triggers other issues which have not been considered by the ECJ’s ruling. These include, but are not limited to trademark law (i.e., whether the use of a company’s names/logos by the web scraper without consent may amount to trademark infringement), data protection (e.g., in case the scraping involves personal data), or unfair competition.


Source URL :http://yellowpagesdatascraping.blogspot.in/2015/07/ecj-clarifies-database-directive-scope.html

Thursday, 7 July 2016

ECJ clarifies Database Directive scope in screen scraping case

EC on the legal protection of databases (Database Directive) in a case concerning the extraction of data from a third party’s website by means of automated systems or software for commercial purposes (so called 'screen scraping').

Flight data extracted

The case, Ryanair Ltd vs. PR Aviation BV, C-30/14, is of interest to a range of companies such as price comparison websites. It stemmed from  Dutch company PR Aviation operation of a website where consumers can search through flight data of low-cost airlines  (including Ryanair), compare prices and, on payment of a commission, book a flight. The relevant flight data is extracted from third-parties’ websites by means of ‘screen scraping’ practices.

Ryanair claimed that PR Aviation’s activity:

• amounted to infringement of copyright (relating to the structure and architecture of the database) and of the so-called sui generis database right (i.e. the right granted to the ‘maker’ of the database where certain investments have been made to obtain, verify, or present the contents of a database) under the Netherlands law implementing the Database Directive;

• constituted breach of contract. In this respect, Ryanair claimed that a contract existed with PR Aviation for the use of its website. Access to the latter requires acceptance, by clicking a box, of the airline’s general terms and conditions which, amongst others, prohibit unauthorized ‘screen scraping’ practices for commercial purposes.

Ryanair asked Dutch courts to prohibit the infringement and order damages. In recent years the company has been engaged in several legal cases against web scrapers across Europe.

The Local Court, Utrecht, and the Court of Appeals of Amsterdam dismissed Ryanair’s claims on different grounds. The Court of Appeals, in particular, cited PR Aviation’s screen scraping of Ryanair’s website as amounting to a “normal use” of said website within the meaning of the lawful user exceptions under Sections 6 and 8 of the Database Directive, which cannot be derogated by contract (Section 15).

Ryanair appealed

Ryanair appealed the decision before the Netherlands Supreme Court (Hoge Raad der Nederlanden), which decided to refer the following question to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling: “Does the application of [Directive 96/9] also extend to online databases which are not protected by copyright on the basis of Chapter II of said directive or by a sui generis right on the basis of Chapter III, in the sense that the freedom to use such databases through the (whether or not analogous) application of Article[s] 6(1) and 8, in conjunction with Article 15 [of Directive 96/9] may not be limited contractually?.”

The ECJ’s ruling

The ECJ (without the need of the opinion of the advocate general) ruled that the Database Directive is not applicable to databases which are not protected either by copyright or by the sui generis database right. Therefore, exceptions to restricted acts set forth by Sections 6 and 8 of the Directive do not prevent the database owner from establishing contractual limitations on its use by third parties. In other words, restrictions to the freedom to contract set forth by the Database Directive do not apply in cases of unprotected databases. Whether Ryanair’s website may be entitled to copyright or sui generis database right protection needs to be determined by the competent national court.

The ECJ’s decision is not particularly striking from a legal standpoint. Yet, it could have a significant impact on the business model of price comparison websites, aggregators, and similar businesses. Owners of databases that could not rely on intellectual property protection may contractually prevent extraction and use (“scraping”) of content from their online databases. Thus, unprotected databases could receive greater protection than the one granted by IP law.

Antitrust implications

However, the lawfulness of contractual restrictions prohibiting access and reuse of data through screen scraping practices should be assessed under an antitrust perspective. In this respect, in 2013 the Court of Milan ruled that Ryanair’s refusal to grant access to its database to the online travel agency Viaggiare S.r.l. amounted to an abuse of dominant position in the downstream market of information and intermediation on flights (decision of June 4, 2013 Viaggiare S.r.l. vs Ryanair Ltd). Indeed, a balance should be struck between the need to compensate the efforts and investments made by the creator of the database with the interest of third parties to be granted with access to information (especially in those cases where the latter are not entitled to copyright protection).

Additionally, web scraping triggers other issues which have not been considered by the ECJ’s ruling. These include, but are not limited to trademark law (i.e., whether the use of a company’s names/logos by the web scraper without consent may amount to trademark infringement), data protection (e.g., in case the scraping involves personal data), or unfair competition.


Source URL :http://yellowpagesdatascraping.blogspot.in/2015/07/ecj-clarifies-database-directive-scope.html