90 points by belter 3 days ago | 25 comments
addy34 2 days ago
GS1 are the ultimate gate keeping monopoly. They provide numbers as a service.
Most retailers like Amazon require you to have a GS1-issued barcode number on your product, and so you need to pay GS1 annually for the right to use a particular number. You can see the pricing here:
https://www.gs1us.org/upcs-barcodes-prefixes/how-to-get-a-up...
That's $250 upfront and $50/year for the right to use 10 numbers. What a business.
They get away with it by being a (tax-exempt) non-profit.
According to ProPublica, the CEO of the US division (Robert Carpenter) earned US$3.3 million in 2022.
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/362...
brazzy 2 days ago
It is a gate that actually needs to be kept, though. Like domain names - which provides an example of how it might be done in a way that allows for competition to lower prices. Although there are of course differences. But dividing the number space across a few competing entities seems a simple solution that should work to some degree.
atoav 2 days ago
But that can lead to problematic situations like with norms where everybody is required to fulfill them by law, but you have to pay in the vicinity of a thousand eurdollars to get the current version, leading to the situation where private people who also would have to fulfill those norms cannot read them and the norm institute can issues minor corrections each year that are meaningless because it means you have to get the new version in your field.
The way I see it at least something like the ISO norms should be paid for by taxes and then made available for free — if you want to require people to uphold those norms.
Now that ISO-example might not be directly translatable to GS-1, after all having a little cost and friction added to the process could be a feature in that case, as it means people won't be as likely to squat on numbers for fun or because they forgot. The question there is only how easy/unbureaucratic it is to get/cancel the number and if the cost is reasonable for people entering the market. And then you have to think again if that model of financing is truly what gives us the best outcome.
addy34 2 days ago
Dividing blocks over multiple competing providers is a good suggestion.
Gigachad 2 days ago
Interestingly, it doesn’t look like IKEA uses UPC barcodes at all and just has their own format and numbers. I guess since they only sell their products in their own stores, there is no need for it to be globally unique.
Teever 2 days ago
There's a lot of junk sold on Amazon and Aliexpress.
MichaelZuo 2 days ago
RaftPeople 2 days ago
I'm curious why you say it's not a limited resource.
Although you could theoretically expand the length of UPC every couple years to keep growing, the reality is that all the systems communicating these numbers back and forth need to have a standard.
In addition, printed barcodes need to fit within the area they are designed to fit in, if they were regularly increasing in size it would impact various systems (e.g. conveyor systems scanners, item labels, etc.)
account42 2 days ago
RaftPeople 24 hours ago
Large companies produce so many UPC's for short lived products, especially fashion apparel, that GS1's rule is that UPC's should not be reused for at least 3 years.
Slartie 2 days ago
So they perfected the "numbers as a service" business model up to the point that your average Joe can now buy themselves their own UPC number for $30 with almost the same simplicity as buying a book on Amazon. Maybe they should literally start selling UPC numbers on Amazon next?
rvba 2 days ago
So 2x more than CEO of the QR company.
addy34 2 days ago
nhatcher 3 days ago
ranger_danger 3 days ago
happytoexplain 3 days ago
Edit: Oh, I guess that's moot since the product barcodes predated the train barcodes anyway.
jcrawfordor 3 days ago
One of the issues is that barcode readers were very large and expensive to construct in the mid-century. The railroad application became practical earlier because of the small number of readers and large amount of space available at railyards. Kartrak readers were small-refrigerator-sized cabinets with arc lamps and an AC motor driving a rotating mirror. They required regular mechanical maintenance. The actual logic was done in a minicomputer installed in a nearby building. Between the optical cabinet and the minicomputer, it probably came out to something like 15 square feet for each reader (and kW power consumption for the arc lamp).
Practical retail barcodes had to wait for a lot more miniaturization of the mechanics and pretty much for lasers, and weren't seen until after Kartrak.
You can tell that Kartrak had a rather distinct lineage from retail barcodes - GTE, who designed Kartrak, don't seem to have been aware of the earlier work at IBM and designed their system independently. WABCO developed a competing system that didn't gain adoption but actually was based on the IBM work and resembles modern barcodes much more. The result is that Kartrak is an exceptionally weird symbology, with a number of design traits that were either not seen at all in other barcodes (the unusual half-toned bars for better performance with arc lamp readers) or not seen until decades later (the use of color and offset start/end points of bars to avoid partial reads).
dctoedt 3 days ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_H._Lemelson#Patents_and...
Animats 3 days ago
ranger_danger 3 days ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Joseph_Woodland?lang=en