I just sent a message through a general app questions in iTunesConnect... does anyone know of a specific Apple e-mail address for these kinds of issues?
If Apple follows the DMCA (and I'm sure they do), they must publish an official address at which copyright violations can be sent. So you shouldn't have to guess how/where to reach them.
Database schemas however are. I believe Ireland also has the concept of database copyright (of course this would mean the act of scraping the timetables from the Dublin bus service website was also illegal)
This isn't directly applicable to the OP, but since a lot of readers are in the US, I thought I'd go into a bit more detail.
In the United States, compilations of data are protected by the Copyright statute. Specifically, any "collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship".
The underlying data is not protectable, but the structure and method of assembly, once the data are incorporated is. In Feist vs. Rural Telephone (499 U.S. 340 (1991)), the Supreme Court looked at what level of originality is required for a compilation to be protectable. The Court held that a white pages phone directory that is just a listing of numbers in a geographical area is not sufficiently original to be protected. Basically, that kind of listing is just a recitation of existing facts in a logical order.
An important quote from that case sets out the factors for courts to consider in deciding what degree of originality is sufficient:
"The compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers. These choices as to selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity, are sufficiently original that Congress may protect such compilations through the copyright laws. "
As is often the case in the law, it doesn't give you a black and white answer, but instead gives a series of guidelines to follow.
Actually, as far as I understand it, though a specific item of data is not copyrightable, the whole collection that you call a phone book is copyrightable.
If I recall correctly, in fact, phone book producers usually include fake numbers in the phone book, so they can tell if you copied their version of the phone book, and sue you for it.
Your understanding is incorrect. In the US (which doesn't apply for this case!) the original case showing that the collection of data is NOT copyrightable was, in fact, a case about copying a phone book. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Tel...
I guess one obvious question is do you have permission from the Dublin Bus company to use their data yourself? From their T&Cs (http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/Legal/) ‘No part of this website may be copied, performed in public, broadcast or adapted without the prior written consent of Córas Iompair Éireann. All rights on this material are reserved.‘ Your own ‘scraping’ of the data is itself legally questionable.
And without those IP permissions in place, in the form of written approval by the bus company to use their data, he risks opening one almighty can of worms…
IANAL, but it is my understanding that you own the copyright on the modifications you make when creating a derivative work, regardless of whether or not the derivative work is itself a copyright violation.
But if the original work was a collection of facts that is not protected by copyright, then your derivative work might not be protected by copyright either. Lists of facts are not protected by copyright in the US.
This is true but mostly an abuse of copyright protections in my opinion.
Look at how Westlaw gained private control over the dissemination of public legal decisions through standardizing and copyrighting their presentation of those decisions.
I happy see people lose at putting up copyright gates of this sort, whatever legal right they might have.
I was in contact with Dublin Bus during the development of the app. Sent them screenshots, etc. Anyone who responded thought it was a good idea, but passed me on to talk to someone else in the bureaucracy (it's a public company funded by the taxpayer).
In the end, the leads fizzled out and I didn't get written permission to use the data from Dublin Bus. I continued to keep them up to date on it, hoping that they'd even call me up on it so that we could figure something out. My objective was to get at the data cleanly without having to scrape, and also to form a relationship that might allow me to use the upcoming real-time data.
As I mentioned in the post, there was no app available for this before mine. Dublin Bus website is a mess (they've updated it in the last few months, but it's still awful) and it's particularly awkward to use on a small screen.
They're a government owned company and others have pointed out that 'data' can't have a copyright, but I'm not really sure to be honest. I suspect they're aware of it and are choosing not to act since it's benefiting their service.
I would argue that this is a different issue to what this other developer has done: He has taken my schema and my translation of the data which is my own original work.
Two wrongs don’t make a right, but I agree you have done work that should be protectable. I commend you for approaching them, but you shouldn’t have given up. Without written agreement from bus company that you have permission it’s going to be very hard to go after him. Get that and you are golden.
Data doesn't have copyright, but in europe a database such as this is protected by the 96/9/EC Database Directive (most members states implemented this around 1999/2000).
This includes non-electronic databases, so even if you scanned all this data from timetables published on paper, they'd still be protected by database rights -- and you don't have the right to use substantial parts of it without a license. (nor does your competitor).
(Assuming a government organization has database rights in the same way a person or corporation can have them).
There was this whole thing with that here in NY with the MTA. They were claiming that their time tables are copyrighted, but after it went in/out of courts it was determined that only the complied versions are and then they opened up their data files for developers. The time a train arrives and departs does not fall under copyright. I'm not sure how things are in the UK but I'd expect them to be fairly similar.
Semi-related: about a week after I had moved to Dublin from the US I made an offhand remark in a shop about being in the UK and was very quickly corrected. I quickly learned my lesson and have moved on to other cultural mistakes. :-)
Similar or not, a lot of very highly-paid lawyers would love to argue over this for weeks.
My general argument is this whole situation is not as clear-cut and black-and-white as the developer in question asserts, however ‘moral’ or justified his objection to second developer’s seemingly less defensible actions in copying his work.
There seems little ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ here, just very subtle shades of grey and legal interpretation of who owns which rights to various elements of data, code, design and structure.
You are only technically correct. Eire is the Irish name for Ireland, but is not commonly used in English. In Ireland, everyone calls Ireland Ireland. Similarly, the language is Irish, not Gaelic. You only hear the words "Eire" and "Gaelic" used outside Ireland, typically in America (except for the small section of the population who actually speak Irish).
If you were to use the Irish term Eire, then it would make sense to use the Irish name for Dublin, which is Baile Atha Cliath, or Dubh Linn, depending.
Mor elike the oppsoite. Ireland is the whole island and Eire is the Republic of Ireland. It also depends on one's politics. Londonderry or Derry ? My t-shirt says "People's Republic of Derry", though round here it gets mis-read as "People's Republic of Derby" which is a neighbouring city!
You're in Europe, you are protected. The database is copyrighted whilst the data isn't itself copyrightable. It is when the act of compiling the data is non-trivial and you can show that the data has resulted from this process (which you appear to be able to given that you have used names and entered routes in a way specific to your process) that you are covered.
I'd start off with talking to him. His website http://www.philipkirwan.ie/site/index.html states that he's doing an undergrad at Dublin City University, which no doubt includes lessons in the social aspect of computing including Copyright, Patents and Data Protection, etc.
My points: He will be well aware of copyright, and the institution really does not want to bring itself into disrepute as a result of the actions of their students. It would not do his study well at all to provable have stolen the work of someone else having been made very well aware of copyright during prior study. The question raised, "Is all of Philip Kirwin's work his own work?". And that for a university, and for Philip himself is a very big deal.
So I'd simply appeal to his own sense of self-preservation in that if he has indeed (as it appears) taken the content from your work and passed it off as his own then he is playing with fire that will burn him far greater than just losing the right to sell one iPhone application.
At this point, he's already potentially damaged his reputation through his actions, now it is up to him to determine whether he wants to salvage this or risk burning himself totally.
Except his own act of compiling is by ‘scraping’ the original source, against their own copyrights and T&Cs. In the case of a bus company’s timetable their own data—the times they run to, routes, etc.—is not public domain unless they release it as such. Both developers are equally at fault unless one or both has written permission to use the data in this manner.
No, but it’s my understanding that you can copyright a collection of them if the act of doing so involved considerable work, as pointed out by warp and myself multiple times. So the original website that was scraped holds such a copyright. Please don’t express your opinion as a fact… Of course, IANAL and don’t play one on TV, so both sides could be argued in court. But the original poster doesn’t have any more rights in the data itself than the person who allegedly ripped him off. He has rights in his code, his database schema, etc., but not in the data itself.
Map makers often add a bit of erroneous information to their maps, which allows them to detect when competitors copy their data outright. A similar approach seems applicable to this kind of application.
Great idea. If your competition gets his data from you, then you can leverage that position of power. First, you'll need to make sure you have the latest data. (If you're both updating with the Apple release cycle, then that will give you at least a week of lead time.) Second, a few booby traps in the data that your app knows to parse out will create angry customers for your competitor (after they wait or a bus that never comes) and you'll have "smoking gun" evidence that he's stealing your DB.
I think once you have sent him a forceful note or two asking him to back off, I would probably drop it. If you want to try and drum up some publicity over it on some other blogs, you might be able to make some headway. But I wouldn't expend lots of energy on him. This sort of thing is akin to people who have their blogs stolen and mirrored by SEO sites using their RSS feeds. You can spend all infinte time and energy chasing after people like this. Alternatively, you can use that same time and energy making new apps and improving existing ones.
I haven't looked at both apps, but I would venture to guess that someone who is cutting corners by stealing from other people is probably also not spending a whole lot of time on design, polish, and user experience. Those are things that are hard to copy effectively and a place where you can set yourself apart.
Having dropped small things on occasion, I am not entirely sure anymore it is the right thing to do. Chances are, it will keep gnawing at you - maybe it is better to just fight for one's rights? It could also be good practice in case something bigger comes up eventually. Then you would already have established contacts with lawyers and what not.
On the other hand, lawyers are costly and in the end might not be able to help. They are prone to suggesting the most expensive course of action, because they get a share of the worth of the case. At least in Germany.
"Chances are, it will keep gnawing at you - maybe it is better to just fight for one's rights?"
There is a large opportunity cost here, since fighting could involve lawyers fees and lost time. I don't think assuaging "that gnawing feeling" is worth thousands of dollars. Learning to let go could be the more lucrative path.
I guess it can only be decided on an individual basis after all.
I think there was a similar discussion here recently, about somebody breaking lose all hell because a company screwed him over 20$. On the one hand it didn't make sense, on the other hand society needs somebody to step up and make a stink, otherwise companies that rip us off small amounts of money would proliferate.
I am not experienced with lawyers. It would be nice if it would be possible to just delegate this nasty stuff to somebody and forget about it (for a fixed fee?). I suppose rich people would just tell their secretaries to deal with it... Maybe some Indian company could step up and provide that service for cheap? Or would it work like that if you already had an established relationship with a lawyer you trust? First negotiations with lawyers seem painful.
Spend your time/money making an application that isn't so easily duplicated. You said it yourself that you weren't planning to make a mint on this. No point in dealing with the hassle of lawyers, paying the lawyers etc.
If you only had one competitor, it would be possible, but being that you have five competitors, and some of them are free, I'd have to say that the market is saturated and its time to get out anyway.
He's certainly not worth trying to sue. But he's worth reporting to his school, publicly nailing to the wall, and the resulting story posted on one's website to discourage anyone thinking of ripping off future apps, if that can be done. Remember, the expectation of punishment for misdeeds like this is an expensive public good, those who maintain it are social altruists.
Don't waste your time on legal action on this iphone app. Yes, notify Apple and publicize it. But, your energy is better spent innovating and hacking. While screen-scraping is hard work it doesn't bring success and other good programmers can re-implement your work without stealing it. Hell, this might be a good opportunity to open source your screen scraper. Publicize it so that others will collaborate on improving it. Then you can focus on more interesting work. Data gathering is hard work, more people doing it make it easier.
What can you do with your app that isn't so easily stolen (and reproduced) and turned into a carbon copy? As you've already seen, public transit apps are a dime a dozen. How about a bigger/better itinerary application that includes trains, planes, and automobile times so that one can put an itinerary together of vacation travel across all of Ireland? Add hotel info, confirmation info, etc, etc, etc...
I don't have the links handy put there have been other articles on HN about lessons from stolen work. Big lesson: it rarely matters because the people stealing ideas and work don't have the skillset to do it themselves. In the long term they can't compete with the new features and directions that you'll go.
What I'm trying to say is, use that energy from your anger to create something fcking awesome that that stupid muppet won't be able to compete with.
* I'm from the US. Yesterday, I learned about the use of the word muppet over on that side of the pond. BRILLIANT!
I'm not sure that it's as clear cut as doing something that can't be easily copied — any iPhone app that stores data locally is vulnerable to this. (In fact, I'd advise other iPhone developers reading this to have a close look at any suspicious competitors). I'm cool with someone 'stealing the idea', just not when they go selling my implementation of it.
I guess his point is to make your new competitive advantage something that isn't easily copied - instead of a data advantage, go for a feature advantage. He doesn't have access to your source code, so he'd have to do real work to make a competitor.
But I feel for you. I definitely think you should tell/threaten to tell his school if he doesn't take it off the app store.
I understand your frustration, but from a different perspective, I think this helps bolster the case for moving on. Since iPhone apps store data locally, making it easy to steal, your iPhone secret sauce can't be the database or database scheme. The secret sauce has to be what you do with that data.
All that said, if you really feel that this is something that you want to do something about in the future, apps like 1password encrypt local data. I haven't done it, and other people have said it's a PITA because documentation is lacking... so YMMV. But, think of it this way, put that anger into learning how to encrypt/decrypt things on the iPhone. You'll gain a great skill while at the same time getting to code a project that allows you to mutter, "Let's see that stupid muppet steal THIS data..."
* Did I really mention that I like the word muppet? :D
In future versions you might include made-up data for a nonexistent bus line, in the same way that cartography companies include nonexistent streets on maps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
Artistic works have a "natural" copyright. (in the united states anyway). You could potentially argue that the schema of your database was a geeky but artistic work. (Layout of data structure, naming of tables etc.) or maybe some other feature of your app.
Anyone with some legal background agree, disagree??
I think a lot of folks are missing the point of this blog post, and that is the App Store ecosystem has turned into the wild-wild west of development. I've never seen anything like how bad it has gotten.
In my case, I run a Web services platform that approximately 10 or so iPhone app developers have licensed and coded applications to. In the beginning, there was only one app that used our services and it became a top-10 paid app. Within weeks I found there were 6 or so apps that sprouted up in the App Store with similar names, exact functionality, yet they were not licensed to use our API and content.
The common thread? They stole the original app's SQLite database, repackaged the interface, and off they went. We blocked these apps from using our platform until they were licensed, but to this day I weekly see apps sprout up that are following the same nefarious business practice. They steal content from a popular innovative app, repackage as their own, and throw it to the masses for the quick buck.
It is disgusting ecosystem. I'd be willing to bet that 80% of the app store content and market is teams stealing and repackaging the 20% of actual true innovation that is occurring.
Have you considered encrypting your database, so that only your app can make sense of it? That's what a friend of mine used to do, and it indeed stopped some superficial copying.
Add a new feature that uses new data, and encrypt that data. Not an insurmountable obstacle, but it will put you ahead of him in the comparisons on the app store as long as you can stay ahead.
But he can do the same thing to you.
In the end, the users win. That's the beauty of a platform that has critical mass in numbers of developers competing to make good apps. Sucks for you (us) unless you look at it as a fun challenge.
A better solution would be hosting it online and then caching it on the client.
With the added benefit of bring able to tell when someone else accesses your content by failing to supply a special request header.
I would start by trying to talk to him. If that didn't work, I would call his school and make them aware of their student's shady doings. Then I would go to Apple and point out Apple is helping this guy to infringe on your copyright (the database is comprised of public data, but your work compiling it is non-trivial).
If the data were kept on-line and cached in the client, you could, as a final step of escalation, render his app useless. Or worse: make it supply wrong routes.
Cheers mate, you got ripped off, that's why I embrace open source.
You should only blame yourself though, you could have had a simple crypt on the db, with a key stored inside the binary. At least it would take a bit more work to rip you off.
I would suggest you go ahead and release your database to the public. The one thing you have that they do not is that you still have your scraper script(s). If it was me, I would create a (restful) web service that allows anyone to utilize your data, moreover, allow people (maybe with a nominal fee) to download the entire database, or if you really wanna get into it, implement keys (kinda like google maps) to access you bus timetable api.
You should only blame yourself though, you could have had a simple crypt on the db, with a key stored inside the binary. At least it would take a bit more work to rip you off.
Well, there's one I didn't expect to see on HN. A developer gets ripped off and told it's his fault for not including some form of DRM.
Does anyone know how iPhone apps are licensed? If this Philip guy bought the app and the database was included with it, are there any terms that say he can't do whatever he wants with the database (e.g., use it for his own app)?
98 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 150 ms ] thread(but I'm too lazy to look for it myself)
It is perfectly legal to go through a phone book and copy it.
In the United States, compilations of data are protected by the Copyright statute. Specifically, any "collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship".
The underlying data is not protectable, but the structure and method of assembly, once the data are incorporated is. In Feist vs. Rural Telephone (499 U.S. 340 (1991)), the Supreme Court looked at what level of originality is required for a compilation to be protectable. The Court held that a white pages phone directory that is just a listing of numbers in a geographical area is not sufficiently original to be protected. Basically, that kind of listing is just a recitation of existing facts in a logical order.
An important quote from that case sets out the factors for courts to consider in deciding what degree of originality is sufficient:
"The compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers. These choices as to selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity, are sufficiently original that Congress may protect such compilations through the copyright laws. "
As is often the case in the law, it doesn't give you a black and white answer, but instead gives a series of guidelines to follow.
If I recall correctly, in fact, phone book producers usually include fake numbers in the phone book, so they can tell if you copied their version of the phone book, and sue you for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
In the EU, while the data itself may not be copyrightable, the act of compiling it into a usable database makes the database defensible.
You're pretty much covered and you won't have to pay a penny.
EDIT: except perhaps the database schema
Europe's laws on derivative works differ greatly from American laws.
Look at how Westlaw gained private control over the dissemination of public legal decisions through standardizing and copyrighting their presentation of those decisions.
I happy see people lose at putting up copyright gates of this sort, whatever legal right they might have.
In the end, the leads fizzled out and I didn't get written permission to use the data from Dublin Bus. I continued to keep them up to date on it, hoping that they'd even call me up on it so that we could figure something out. My objective was to get at the data cleanly without having to scrape, and also to form a relationship that might allow me to use the upcoming real-time data.
As I mentioned in the post, there was no app available for this before mine. Dublin Bus website is a mess (they've updated it in the last few months, but it's still awful) and it's particularly awkward to use on a small screen.
They're a government owned company and others have pointed out that 'data' can't have a copyright, but I'm not really sure to be honest. I suspect they're aware of it and are choosing not to act since it's benefiting their service.
I would argue that this is a different issue to what this other developer has done: He has taken my schema and my translation of the data which is my own original work.
They have original creator rights and recourse for the way you extracted data without those permissions in place. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/73032--c.htm#15
While you could argue he has ripped you off, without that written permission to use the data you can’t effectively argue your case.
I’d say your sin was less deliberate and more from a position of ignorance, but sadly in law that’s little defence.
(IANAL, usual caveats apply. Seek legal advice, blah, blah.)
This includes non-electronic databases, so even if you scanned all this data from timetables published on paper, they'd still be protected by database rights -- and you don't have the right to use substantial parts of it without a license. (nor does your competitor).
(Assuming a government organization has database rights in the same way a person or corporation can have them).
I'd be happy to have someone with some authority in Dublin Bus even notice it though!
* we're not in the UK ;)
My general argument is this whole situation is not as clear-cut and black-and-white as the developer in question asserts, however ‘moral’ or justified his objection to second developer’s seemingly less defensible actions in copying his work.
There seems little ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ here, just very subtle shades of grey and legal interpretation of who owns which rights to various elements of data, code, design and structure.
If you were to use the Irish term Eire, then it would make sense to use the Irish name for Dublin, which is Baile Atha Cliath, or Dubh Linn, depending.
I think this is something I just sort of picked up though -- so it's entirely possible I'm totally out to lunch.
Can't give you any legal advice though. I reckon you should go after what others recommend here.
I'd start off with talking to him. His website http://www.philipkirwan.ie/site/index.html states that he's doing an undergrad at Dublin City University, which no doubt includes lessons in the social aspect of computing including Copyright, Patents and Data Protection, etc.
My points: He will be well aware of copyright, and the institution really does not want to bring itself into disrepute as a result of the actions of their students. It would not do his study well at all to provable have stolen the work of someone else having been made very well aware of copyright during prior study. The question raised, "Is all of Philip Kirwin's work his own work?". And that for a university, and for Philip himself is a very big deal.
So I'd simply appeal to his own sense of self-preservation in that if he has indeed (as it appears) taken the content from your work and passed it off as his own then he is playing with fire that will burn him far greater than just losing the right to sell one iPhone application.
At this point, he's already potentially damaged his reputation through his actions, now it is up to him to determine whether he wants to salvage this or risk burning himself totally.
Only studying a Bachelors degree. He'd definitely be aware of the legal positioning of copyright though.
Report him IMO. Rights Infringement.
Computing Dr Stephen Blott
Work Area: Head of School
I haven't looked at both apps, but I would venture to guess that someone who is cutting corners by stealing from other people is probably also not spending a whole lot of time on design, polish, and user experience. Those are things that are hard to copy effectively and a place where you can set yourself apart.
On the other hand, lawyers are costly and in the end might not be able to help. They are prone to suggesting the most expensive course of action, because they get a share of the worth of the case. At least in Germany.
There is a large opportunity cost here, since fighting could involve lawyers fees and lost time. I don't think assuaging "that gnawing feeling" is worth thousands of dollars. Learning to let go could be the more lucrative path.
I think there was a similar discussion here recently, about somebody breaking lose all hell because a company screwed him over 20$. On the one hand it didn't make sense, on the other hand society needs somebody to step up and make a stink, otherwise companies that rip us off small amounts of money would proliferate.
I am not experienced with lawyers. It would be nice if it would be possible to just delegate this nasty stuff to somebody and forget about it (for a fixed fee?). I suppose rich people would just tell their secretaries to deal with it... Maybe some Indian company could step up and provide that service for cheap? Or would it work like that if you already had an established relationship with a lawyer you trust? First negotiations with lawyers seem painful.
Spend your time/money making an application that isn't so easily duplicated. You said it yourself that you weren't planning to make a mint on this. No point in dealing with the hassle of lawyers, paying the lawyers etc.
If you only had one competitor, it would be possible, but being that you have five competitors, and some of them are free, I'd have to say that the market is saturated and its time to get out anyway.
Sure - He have the submitters story, but he hasn't provided us with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Philip has stolen his database.
1. Buy them, right click on both apps in your iTunes Apps list and choose 'Reveal in Finder'.
2. Copy both to your desktop.
3. Rename them to .zip and unzip them
4. Click on the app file and choose 'Show Package Contents'
5. Compare dublinbus.db with dublinbus.png2
They are not totally identical, but there is a very significant overlap that cannot be down to chance.
Also, his e-mail to me admits that he copied my 'layout'.
Though, I agree that his website doesn't him look 'dodgy' by itself.
That wasn't my intention. my intention was that when someone Googles his name they'll get lots of pages saying he's a dodgy person.
Since you know that you will not have a profit , why didnt you add the app free and add commercials to it.
That way yours will be free and there will be no need for anyone to copy it and at the same time have some profit from ads.
What can you do with your app that isn't so easily stolen (and reproduced) and turned into a carbon copy? As you've already seen, public transit apps are a dime a dozen. How about a bigger/better itinerary application that includes trains, planes, and automobile times so that one can put an itinerary together of vacation travel across all of Ireland? Add hotel info, confirmation info, etc, etc, etc...
I don't have the links handy put there have been other articles on HN about lessons from stolen work. Big lesson: it rarely matters because the people stealing ideas and work don't have the skillset to do it themselves. In the long term they can't compete with the new features and directions that you'll go.
What I'm trying to say is, use that energy from your anger to create something fcking awesome that that stupid muppet won't be able to compete with.
* I'm from the US. Yesterday, I learned about the use of the word muppet over on that side of the pond. BRILLIANT!
I'm not sure that it's as clear cut as doing something that can't be easily copied — any iPhone app that stores data locally is vulnerable to this. (In fact, I'd advise other iPhone developers reading this to have a close look at any suspicious competitors). I'm cool with someone 'stealing the idea', just not when they go selling my implementation of it.
But I feel for you. I definitely think you should tell/threaten to tell his school if he doesn't take it off the app store.
All that said, if you really feel that this is something that you want to do something about in the future, apps like 1password encrypt local data. I haven't done it, and other people have said it's a PITA because documentation is lacking... so YMMV. But, think of it this way, put that anger into learning how to encrypt/decrypt things on the iPhone. You'll gain a great skill while at the same time getting to code a project that allows you to mutter, "Let's see that stupid muppet steal THIS data..."
* Did I really mention that I like the word muppet? :D
Anyone with some legal background agree, disagree??
In my case, I run a Web services platform that approximately 10 or so iPhone app developers have licensed and coded applications to. In the beginning, there was only one app that used our services and it became a top-10 paid app. Within weeks I found there were 6 or so apps that sprouted up in the App Store with similar names, exact functionality, yet they were not licensed to use our API and content.
The common thread? They stole the original app's SQLite database, repackaged the interface, and off they went. We blocked these apps from using our platform until they were licensed, but to this day I weekly see apps sprout up that are following the same nefarious business practice. They steal content from a popular innovative app, repackage as their own, and throw it to the masses for the quick buck.
It is disgusting ecosystem. I'd be willing to bet that 80% of the app store content and market is teams stealing and repackaging the 20% of actual true innovation that is occurring.
Ever tried to make money with off-the-shelf software in the early 80's? ;-)
Well... At least, at that time, they had to swap floppies.
But he can do the same thing to you.
In the end, the users win. That's the beauty of a platform that has critical mass in numbers of developers competing to make good apps. Sucks for you (us) unless you look at it as a fun challenge.
With the added benefit of bring able to tell when someone else accesses your content by failing to supply a special request header.
I would start by trying to talk to him. If that didn't work, I would call his school and make them aware of their student's shady doings. Then I would go to Apple and point out Apple is helping this guy to infringe on your copyright (the database is comprised of public data, but your work compiling it is non-trivial).
If the data were kept on-line and cached in the client, you could, as a final step of escalation, render his app useless. Or worse: make it supply wrong routes.
You should only blame yourself though, you could have had a simple crypt on the db, with a key stored inside the binary. At least it would take a bit more work to rip you off.
I would suggest you go ahead and release your database to the public. The one thing you have that they do not is that you still have your scraper script(s). If it was me, I would create a (restful) web service that allows anyone to utilize your data, moreover, allow people (maybe with a nominal fee) to download the entire database, or if you really wanna get into it, implement keys (kinda like google maps) to access you bus timetable api.
also: look at the time of day on this screenshot: http://www.dublinbusapp.com/dbmaps/Dublin_Bus_Maps.html