Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

skiplagged.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

#141

Post by ElComradio »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #136
ElComradio wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can: > the contracts say that you are expected to use all legs of the tickets and > There are no legal repercussions for the passenger not using all legs of the flights both be true? In other words, I as the customer have no obligation to use all legs of the flight. I did not promise the airline I would fly all the way to my destination (as far as I know); I do not promise that I even get on the flight at all. Ho…

The latter is not true. Airlines' contracts of carriage prohibit "Point Beyond Ticketing." Here is what (e.g.) United's contract of carriage says: > Fares apply for travel only between the points for which they are published. Tickets may not be purchased and used at fare(s) from an initial departure point on the Ticket which is before the Passenger’s actual point of origin of travel, or to a more distant point(s) tha…

> Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law,

That sounds like the rub. It is against the law to not board a leg of a flight? Doubtful.

Re: Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

#142

Post by colordrops »

jowiar wrote: post #110
colordrops wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again, what law or contract has skiplagged broken? They do not purchase tickets, and they do not enter contracts with airlines.

IANAL, but I would imagine that they're in a similar situation to ThePirateBay -- "We aren't doing anything wrong - we're just giving information to other people how they can". I'm curious how the case is going to shake out.

ThePirateBay is a terrible precedent. Pointing at criminals should never be a crime.

Re: Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

#143

Post by pdabbadabba »

ElComradio wrote: post #141
pdabbadabba wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latter is not true. Airlines' contracts of carriage prohibit "Point Beyond Ticketing." Here is what (e.g.) United's contract of carriage says: > Fares apply for travel only between the points for which they are published. Tickets may not be purchased and used at fare(s) from an initial departure point on the Ticket which is before the Passenger’s actual point of origin of travel, or to a more distant point(s) tha…

> Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law, That sounds like the rub. It is against the law to not board a leg of a flight? Doubtful.

Read the rest of the phrase!

> Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law, these rules or any fare rule (including Hidden Cities Ticketing, Point Beyond Ticketing, Throwaway Ticketing, or Back-to-Back Ticketing)

Re: Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

#144

Post by ElComradio »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #143
ElComradio wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law, That sounds like the rub. It is against the law to not board a leg of a flight? Doubtful.

Read the rest of the phrase! > Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law, these rules or any fare rule (including Hidden Cities Ticketing, Point Beyond Ticketing, Throwaway Ticketing, or Back-to-Back Ticketing)

I did but I interpreted the first clause as a precondition of the following ones. I see now.

It still seems unclear that there are legal ramifications. It simply sets out a list of consequences should you not follow through. I suppose they could attempt to come after you in small claims court if you refused to pay.

Re: Skiplagged sued by United and Orbitz

#145

Post by SilasX »

jowiar wrote: post #43
cynix wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should just reduce the price of LAX-SFO and SFO-PDX accordingly, so that the cost of LAX-SFO-PDX is the sum of LAX-SFO and SFO-PDX. If I can afford to carry the passenger through LAX-SFO-PDX for $190, then I can afford to carry her LAX-SFO for $x and SFO-PDX for $(190-x).

But you have a near-full plane of passengers perfectly willing to pay $200 to fly from LAX to SFO - you're throwing away profit from all of them if you cut their fare because I'm competing for a different set of customers.

True, but there are going to be other carriers on each leg -- presumably, some who don't carry on to the same cities after landing. That should keep there from being significant profits to be had on overcharging so severely for individual legs of the route.
Post reply on HN