Steal This Barcode
from the do-it-yourself-repricing dept
Apparently there's a website out there that lets people design their own barcodes (including whatever price you want) that can be placed over the real barcodes of products in stores (not legally, of course). The site, itself, Re-code.com is a pretty brilliantly done piece of satire. Wal-Mart however, doesn't get the humor, and says it's an "incitement to theft and fraud." The question at the heart of this are whether or not the 10-digit barcodes numbers are intellectual property? Clearly, actually replacing the prices in stores breaks the law. However, is setting up a site that lets you create the barcodes guilty of the same? The (anonymous) person behind the site points out: "If the argument is that we're facilitating theft, then they should be going after the people who invented the barcode, which is the thing that's making it easier to steal."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not so easy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not so easy?
I recently found a dvd that I wanted advertised on the Border's website. When I got to the store, it was significantly more expensive. I told them about the price on the internet, then they entered a product code or something and got the real advertised price.
My theory is that they can get more money out of the inattentive or the impulse shopper this way.
Consumers have to work to defend themselves. It is no accident that the majority of barcode price errors are in the store's favor. If it really were an accident, there would be an even distribution of wins and loses for the store.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well,
Now, a long time ago when scanners weren't all over the place like they are now, I can remember Club Foods (A warehouse like chain) having a table set up at the entrance with markers that were supposed to allow you to change the UPC so you could mark your own price. Of course it never worked. And I figured that if I did manage to change something that would work, it would be for the worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE-CODE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE-CODE
I think you're missing the point... They're saying that police should absolutely go after anyone who actually does use this stuff to steal... however, what they're trying to do in this case is exactly what you say: going after the people who make the tools that people use to break in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE-CODE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re-Code
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re-Code
What bothers me is that Wal*Mart is taking legal action to try to limit free speech; others who posted above have called it punishing the makers of the tools rather than those who find the tools' faults and there is some logic in that. But it's much more fundamentally wrong, what Wal*Mart is trying to do: Anything for the bottom dollar, even if that includes ignoring every principle written down by a bunch of really smart guys 227 years ago.
~Justin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re-Code
-maouse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re-Code
The bottom line here is...the bottom line. Merchants are trying to reduce their costs in every possible way: elimination of price-on-product tags, installation of self-check-out cash registers, reduction of inventory to the bare minimum. Adding the extra security for checking the contents of your shopping bag is fairly expensive, and only works when you don't have mobs of people trying to exit the store.
There are other technologies available that are much harder to defeat than barcode: embedded RF tags (as advertised by IBM on TV a couple of years ago)...or for that matter, internet shopping. However, these alternatives cost more and are much less acceptable than the "traditional" shopping experience - entering a store, playing with the merchandise, talking to a clerk. Most people won't pay the extra price (either cost or time) these alternatives demand. IBM has installed very few (mostly demo) sites with RF product tags, and PeaPod's failure shows just how little most people will pay for convenience. Which leaves retailers only one alternative: make it too hard for the average shopper to defeat the existing technology.
To summarize: while the attack on Re-Code may be unjustified, it is the cheapest way for big retailers to address this problem. Same thing as Napster's demise: cheaper to remove a competitor than to develop a new marketing plan...
(BTW, you DID know that self-checkout terminals weigh the products you put in your bag? If you reprice a CD, it better have the same mass as the item it replaces...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]