Logistics and distribution
ACES and PIES catalog data: who owns it, and can a distributor license it?
By SourceX Editorial · Reviewed by Noah Loul ·
Short answer
ACES and PIES are exchange standards, so ownership depends on who created each file: suppliers generally control their fitment and product content, catalog providers control their compiled databases, and the distributor controls its own orders, lookups and returns. A distributor can usually license only that third layer, after supplier and provider content is removed.
Key takeaways
- The ACES and PIES standards set how catalog data is formatted; they do not decide who owns any file built with them.
- Supplier-authored fitment and product files usually come with use limits tied to selling the supplier's parts.
- eCatalog provider contracts commonly restrict extraction, redistribution and derivative databases, and some claim rights in usage data.
- Lookup logs, no-find searches and wrong-part returns are the distributor's own records and carry real-world signal.
- Reference database identifiers may carry subscription terms, so check them before including coded vehicle fields.
Why the standard is not the data#
ACES and PIES are standards, maintained by the Auto Care Association, that set how aftermarket fitment and product information is structured and exchanged. ACES describes which parts fit which vehicles; PIES describes the parts themselves, such as dimensions, packaging, descriptions and images. Using a standard gives no one ownership of the files built with it.
Ownership follows creation and contract. A supplier that authors an ACES file for its brake pads controls that content. A catalog provider that cleans, combines and enriches files from many suppliers controls its compiled product. A distributor that records what counter staff searched, sold and took back controls those transaction records. A single counter lookup can touch all three layers at once.
Who controls each layer of aftermarket catalog data#
Aftermarket catalog data sits in layers, and each layer has a different controller. The table separates them; your supplier agreements and catalog contracts decide the details.
| Layer | Examples | Typically controlled by | Licensing posture for a distributor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standards and reference databases | ACES and PIES specifications, vehicle configuration and part type reference tables | Standards body, under subscription terms | Not the distributor's to license; check terms before using coded identifiers |
| Supplier fitment and product files | ACES application files, PIES item files, images, marketing copy | Supplier | Excluded unless the supplier grants permission |
| Catalog provider data | Compiled catalogs, interchange tables, buyer's guides, search indexes | Catalog provider | Excluded; contracts usually bar redistribution |
| Distributor enrichment | Custom descriptions, local interchange, kit and bundle definitions | Distributor, if built independently | Possible, after confirming it was not copied from licensed content |
| Distributor transaction records | Orders, invoices, returns with reasons, warranty claims | Distributor | Strong candidate after preparation |
| Distributor lookup records | Vehicle searches, no-find events, part views, counter notes | Distributor, subject to any provider claim on usage data | Strong candidate once provider terms are checked |
What eCatalog provider contracts usually say#
eCatalog provider contracts usually license catalog content to the distributor for a defined purpose, such as looking up and selling parts to customers, and prohibit most other uses. The clauses below decide whether anything touching the catalog can leave the business.
The usage data clause is the one most distributors have never read. If a provider's terms give it rights in lookup logs generated inside its platform, the distributor may still hold its own copies, but outside licensing needs a closer look. If lookups are logged in the distributor's own point-of-sale or ecommerce system, the position is usually simpler.
- License grant: whether use is limited to internal lookup and customer-facing display.
- Restrictions: bans on scraping, bulk extraction, redistribution and building competing or derivative databases.
- Usage data: whether the provider claims ownership of, or rights in, search logs and analytics generated in its system.
- Uploaded data: rights the provider takes in your price files, inventory and custom content.
- Termination: what must be deleted when the contract ends, and whether you can export your own records first.
- Audit: the provider's right to verify compliance with use limits.
Which distributor records can be licensed#
The distributor records that can be licensed are those it creates while serving customers. A wrong-part return with a reason code, a counter note explaining that a listing missed a mid-year engine change, or a no-find search followed by a manual lookup all describe how real parts problems get solved.
That signal is what AI developers building parts lookup, diagnostic and service assistants tend to lack. Published catalogs say what should fit; a distributor's history shows what customers asked for, what was sold, what came back and why. Individual fields are usually treated as follows.
Warranty claims and supersession histories add another layer. A claim that records the failed part, the vehicle, the mileage band and the replacement shows how parts perform in service, and a supersession trail shows how a distributor kept customers supplied when a number changed. Both come from the distributor's own systems, although warranty programs may carry supplier confidentiality terms worth checking.
| Field or element | Usual treatment before licensing |
|---|---|
| Vehicle year, make, model and engine from a lookup | Keep as plain attributes |
| Reference database identifiers | Keep only if subscription terms permit; otherwise convert to plain attributes |
| Supplier part numbers on orders and returns | Review with counsel; often replaced with part category codes |
| Supplier descriptions, images and marketing copy | Remove |
| Catalog provider interchange and buyer's guide content | Remove |
| VINs, repair shop names, technician names | Remove or replace with coded identifiers |
| Return reason codes and counter notes | Keep after review for personal details |
Mistakes that mix the layers#
The most common mistake is loading the full catalog into a data warehouse alongside orders and returns, so that supplier descriptions and provider interchange end up in every extract. Once mixed, separating them takes far more work than keeping them apart from the start.
Other mistakes include assuming an enhanced catalog is entirely the distributor's because staff edited it, switching catalog providers without exporting lookup history, and keeping VINs in return records long after the claim closed. Each one narrows what can later be licensed.
Illustrative: a multi-store aftermarket distributor#
Illustrative: a fictional aftermarket distributor runs company stores and supplies independent repair shops and jobbers. Its business system holds orders, returns and warranty claims; counter staff look up parts through a licensed eCatalog; and its ecommerce site logs vehicle searches in the distributor's own database.
Counsel reviews the eCatalog contract and finds that the provider claims rights in usage analytics generated inside its platform but not in data the distributor captures in its own systems. The distributor therefore works from its ecommerce search log and its own return records, and leaves the eCatalog's internal lookup reports out.
Preparation strips supplier descriptions and images, converts reference identifiers to plain vehicle attributes pending a terms check, and replaces shop and technician names with codes. The package that goes forward links orders, returns with reason codes and counter notes by vehicle and part category, with no supplier content or provider data.
How SourceX approaches aftermarket catalog records#
SourceX maps catalog layers in the Rights step of the SourceX five-step transaction, before any preparation work begins. Supplier content and catalog provider data are identified and excluded, and contracts with usage data terms are flagged for counsel.
Preparation then removes VINs, shop and technician names and supplier text, and the distributor approves the result. The SourceX Evidence Packet traces each field back to its layer as part of the provenance record, alongside licensing rights, permitted use, the privacy record and release authorization.
Nothing is shared during the initial fit check. The distributor describes its business system, eCatalog arrangement, ecommerce search logging and approximate years of history, which is enough to judge whether a rights review is worth starting.
Frequently asked questions
Is a VIN personal information?
A VIN identifies a vehicle, not a person, but linked to an owner, address or repair history it can be treated as personal information under some privacy laws. Remove VINs or replace them with coded identifiers before outside use, and keep only the decoded vehicle attributes you need.
Can we license the catalog enhancements our team built?
Possibly, if the enhancements were created independently rather than copied or derived from supplier or provider content. Kit definitions or local interchange built from sales experience are stronger candidates than edited supplier descriptions. Counsel should review how the enhancements were made before they are included.
What happens to lookup history when we change catalog providers?
Lookup history stored in the old provider's platform may be deleted or become inaccessible when the contract ends, depending on its terms. Export whatever the contract allows before the switch, and log searches in your own systems going forward so the history stays yours.
Do suppliers object to return data that names their parts?
Some may, especially when return reasons point to quality or fitment problems with a brand, and supply agreements may treat certain information as confidential. Replacing brand part numbers with part categories often addresses the concern while keeping the signal.
Can a distributor license the ACES files suppliers send it?
In most cases not without the supplier's permission. Those files are supplier content provided so the distributor can sell the supplier's parts, and the supplier's terms and any catalog provider contract usually limit other uses.
Related resources
See if your company qualifies
A short company assessment. No data uploads are needed.