I've spent a lot of time building a real estate SaaS that lets an agent enter a client's requirements—such as a three-bedroom apartment in New Cairo with a $100k–$150k budget—and then finds matching properties across multiple real estate platforms. I also built a feature that monitors public posts from people looking for apartments and matches those requests with suitable properties.
The product is mostly finished, but the platforms I planned to use, including Dubizzle, prohibit scraping in their terms of service. I contacted some of them about permission or API access, but they were not interested. That leaves me with a working product whose main value depends on data I may not be allowed to collect.
I'm looking for legitimate alternatives rather than a way to bypass their restrictions. Has anyone dealt with a business whose original data source became unavailable? Should I pivot to agent-submitted listings, use licensed or public datasets, or create referral partnerships with listing platforms and agencies?
4 Answers
The platforms may see your product as competition if you copy their listings and remove the need for users to visit their sites. Instead of asking for generic API access, offer a partnership with a clear benefit: qualified buyer leads, attribution, referral fees, or a paid feed where they control the data and terms.
For example, approach individual agencies with something like: “We have buyers actively searching for properties in this area. Would you provide an approved listing feed or let us route qualified leads to your agents for a referral fee?” That gives them a reason to participate.
You can preserve the core value proposition even if the inventory source changes. Let agents connect spreadsheets, CSV files, CRM exports, or approved feeds, then normalize those listings and match them against client requirements. The agent still avoids searching several systems manually.
You could start with a narrow market and a few agencies that provide inventory, prove that the matching generates leads, and expand from there. Public government records may be useful for some property facts, but they usually won’t replace current market listings and may have their own usage restrictions.
I wouldn’t build the business around a loophole. Terms of service, copyright, database rights, privacy rules, and access controls can all matter, and the practical risk depends on the country and how the data is used. Have a local lawyer review the specific sources before launching.
A safer pivot is to let agents import data they are authorized to use, integrate with agencies that give written permission, or use official feeds and licensed listing providers. You could also build the matching and lead-management layer so the data owner keeps control of the listings.
Consider separating the product into two parts: the matching engine and the data acquisition. The matching engine can be sold to brokerages or agencies that already have lawful access to inventory. You could also support user-provided listing URLs without copying restricted content, subject to the sites’ rules, or simply send users to the original listing for the full details.
Before choosing that approach, verify whether storing URLs, snippets, images, or derived data is permitted. Avoid relying on public social-group monitoring unless you have permission and a compliant way to handle people’s personal information.
That makes sense. I was focused on aggregating everything automatically, but a permission-based feed or referral arrangement could preserve the matching experience without relying on unauthorized collection.