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

Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 285 posts

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#211

Post by a_c »

gmueckl wrote: post #193
C1sc0cat wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As one who specialises in enterprise SEO. That is still an issue with many businesses, websites are still seen as just an electronic version of a poster on a bill board, its gradually changing. And Eu companies are even worse, a few years back I suggested a link from a German parents website to the uk subsidiary and was told the Head office lawyers where checking to see if they "where allowed" to add a link.

In German law, if you add a link to another site somewhere on your own site, you take responsibility for the content on the site you link you. You are required to check for that or face liability. This the result of years of court cases around this matter. And courts don't usually understand much about the web, let alone tech in general. So while involving lawyers every time is definitely high on the CYA scale, it ma…

I am very curious to know if the rule of "being responsible to the link a website links to" applies transitively, i.e. a link in the link my website link to. If applies, then can the law be interpreted as my website needs to be responsible to the entire internet. On the flip side, if the rule only applies to one layer deep, then a url shortener would defeat the whole law

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#212

Post by pbhjpbhj »

gmueckl wrote: post #193
C1sc0cat wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As one who specialises in enterprise SEO. That is still an issue with many businesses, websites are still seen as just an electronic version of a poster on a bill board, its gradually changing. And Eu companies are even worse, a few years back I suggested a link from a German parents website to the uk subsidiary and was told the Head office lawyers where checking to see if they "where allowed" to add a link.

In German law, if you add a link to another site somewhere on your own site, you take responsibility for the content on the site you link you. You are required to check for that or face liability. This the result of years of court cases around this matter. And courts don't usually understand much about the web, let alone tech in general. So while involving lawyers every time is definitely high on the CYA scale, it ma…

So how many times have each of the search engines been sued?

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#213

Post by gmueckl »

a_c wrote: post #211
gmueckl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In German law, if you add a link to another site somewhere on your own site, you take responsibility for the content on the site you link you. You are required to check for that or face liability. This the result of years of court cases around this matter. And courts don't usually understand much about the web, let alone tech in general. So while involving lawyers every time is definitely high on the CYA scale, it ma…

I am very curious to know if the rule of "being responsible to the link a website links to" applies transitively, i.e. a link in the link my website link to. If applies, then can the law be interpreted as my website needs to be responsible to the entire internet. On the flip side, if the rule only applies to one layer deep, then a url shortener would defeat the whole law

The rule applies to the content you end up seeing after your browser follows all automatic redirects and possibly even interstitials (ads/disclaimers). Redirects are an irrelevant technical detail in this context.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#214

Post by growlist »

leokennis wrote: post #148
growlist wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy throw away comment to make but don't forget lots of honest people in Tunisia are trying to make a living out of tourism, and from a selfish point of view having been to Tunisia there is loads of good stuff to see.

My experience is based on Egypt tourism. I'm not saying the people themselves aren't honest (in their private lives) but once there's money on the line, all honesty and nicety is out of the window immediately Begging, intense heckling, not taking no for an answer, rudely pushing upsells, sowing FOD to make an extra buck...

I found Morocco worse than Tunisia on this aspect, tbh.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#215

Post by gmueckl »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #212
gmueckl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In German law, if you add a link to another site somewhere on your own site, you take responsibility for the content on the site you link you. You are required to check for that or face liability. This the result of years of court cases around this matter. And courts don't usually understand much about the web, let alone tech in general. So while involving lawyers every time is definitely high on the CYA scale, it ma…

So how many times have each of the search engines been sued?

Guess why the remaining search engines are so good at classifying certain types of sites of the "adult entertainment" and and other such types?

I am not sure if the courts distinguish between automatically generated pages and authored/curated content that involves human input in its creation. Courts haven't been exactly consistent on these points.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#216

Post by pbhjpbhj »

theboulevardier wrote: post #204
tpmx wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suddenly Google's ad profits make a lot more sense.

If you go with Google's suggestions when you setup an Adwords campaign, they will absolutely rinse your budget with minimal return. Google has a churn and burn mentality when it comes their Adwords customers as most new businesses fail within 12 months.

It would be interesting to know how significant a factor it is that established b2b companies try their best to rip off the new companies.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#217

Post by pbhjpbhj »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #167
hnarn wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't hotels realise this is a reputation business? I would say that the facts presented above answer that question for you.

Indeed. What reputation? A lot of tourists are shopping for price, the only reputation that matters is that of the booking site they use - the visitors want to trust that the site doesn't peddle total low-end garbage. Hotels are a commodity.

I took some package tours back in the day: you could get a good deal by not knowing where you would end up. Thomas Cook, or whoever, booked you in to a resort for a given price and put you in one of "their" hotels. Reputation of the individual hotels was not an issue, only of the travel company. Which is kinda how it should be -- why use a travel company and do all the legwork yourself, that would be like going to a restaurant and then checking the suppliers when choosing a dish off the menu.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#218

Post by gmueckl »

irrational wrote: post #197
gmueckl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In German law, if you add a link to another site somewhere on your own site, you take responsibility for the content on the site you link you. You are required to check for that or face liability. This the result of years of court cases around this matter. And courts don't usually understand much about the web, let alone tech in general. So while involving lawyers every time is definitely high on the CYA scale, it ma…

Are they expected to continually monitor the linked website? What happens if they add the link and then a week later something "bad" is added to some sub-page of the linked website?

A quick search seems to indicate that yes, you might be responsible for linking to the altered content. As a website author you have - in principle - a duty to check what you are linking to. It is unclear what that means in practice. I would guess that it would involve a test if timely detection of alteres content on the linked site would have imposed an undue burden. The only part that is absolutely certain is that a website owner must react if they are notified that they are linking to illegal content. Other than that, it's seemingly a grey area.

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#219

Post by Erwin »

dehrmann wrote: post #47
wp381640 wrote: post #16

Reminder again to never hold gift cards. I had a family member who was gited a $3,000 travel voucher with an agency - I told them to exchange it in for flights asap as you can book up to a year out, change the tickets later and it's better to be a creditor with a national airline than a likely-going-out-of-business-because-of-online travel agency

The gift card market just confuses me. Especially when it's people giving gifts to people (not corporate gifts), cash is something that has at least as much value as the gift card, is accept everywhere, isn't a liability on a balance sheet, and is easier to give.

There's one online alcohol retailer that will actually give you 5% on any gift cards you buy -- and they never expire: https://www.masterofmalt.com/gift-vouchers/

Re: Thomas Cook collapses, stranding 150k UK holidaymakers

#220

Post by pbhjpbhj »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #169
buboard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's completely ridiculous behavior. If anything, they should lock them OUT of the hotel

It's the classic I've seen used in jokes and comic strips - entry is free; once you enter, you discover that leaving costs money.

That's normal in the service industry, or in shops, for example. You get what you want, then pay on leaving. If you don't pay they detain you.

Try leaving your local restaurant without someone paying for the food. They won't care if you paid your friend for the meal and he kept the money.

Post reply on HN