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

Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

courthousenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#91

Post by CogitoCogito »

Dalewyn wrote: post #83
smashah wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skipping a queue in traffic is an asshole thing to do, but we in a society give them the benefit of the doubt because we don't know what they're going through. It inconveniences literally everyone, yet it would be weird for the driver to be blocked from that road for doing so. We shouldn't accept arbitrary restrictions from stupid megacorps. I studied Aviation engineering with Pilot studies and am also a frequent fly…

>legitimate reasons to skiplag? i.e they cannot afford the full fare, Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it. >they cannot make the following flight for other reasons? Sure, but that's not skiplagging. >Being on a megacorps side against consumers is strange behaviour. I am siding with common decency. If you lie in the course of business just to save some pretty penn…

> If skiplagging becomes more common, airlines will ultimately raise prices for everyone to make up for the inefficiency and everyone loses. Screw that noise.

How would everyone lose? Bans against skiplagging allow airlines to divorce their ticket prices from the costs of the underlying service. If airlines were say not allowed to ban skiplagging, they would be forced to price their tickets more in line with the underlying costs (on competitive routes anyway) so we should expect some routes' ticket costs to decrease.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#92

Post by CogitoCogito »

Dalewyn wrote: post #89
CogitoCogito wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines choose these ticketing policies and customers react to them rationally. If the airlines allowed customers to notify them that they won't be taking the final flight without any extra costs, then they wouldn't have to worry about no-shows like this (they could even resell the seat). The airlines are choosing their pricing mechanisms and can live with the consequences.

>customers react to them rationally There is nothing rational about maliciously misleading someone in a business transaction. >If the airlines allowed customers to notify them that they won't be taking the final flight without any extra costs, You absolutely can: Just walk up to the nearest ticketing counter on your way out the airport and let them know you won't be flying. Simple, done. You might still get blacklist…

> There is nothing rational about maliciously misleading someone in a business transaction.

Honestly at this point I think you're just being purposefully obtuse. Of course it's rational for customers to but a ticket A -> B -> C if they want to fly A -> B and the ticket A -> B -> C is cheaper than the ticket A -> B. What's irrational is for airlines to price their tickets that way.

> You absolutely can: Just walk up to the nearest ticketing counter on your way out the airport and let them know you won't be flying. Simple, done. You might still get blacklisted, but you are presumably okay with the consequences.

Once again you seem to just be willfully obtuse here. Being blacklisted is quite obviously a cost. Passengers being blacklisted means that _rational_ customers doing this won't tell the airline. If the airline didn't want passengers to skip the final leg of their flight without telling them, they could simply allow the customer to notify them without extra costs. They choose blacklisting (or charging to to "change" your ticket to not take the final flight) and this is the result.

I mean I get that you work in the airline industry and hence align your arguments to those that profit the airlines, but you really should accept that the airlines are knowingly creating this environment and that customers are just reacting exactly as you'd expect.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#93

Post by anticensor »

librish wrote: post #41
mtlynch wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>* the restrictions (no carry-on, ...* You mean no checked baggage, right? Carry-on is fine.

Carry-on might get gate-checked if you're unlucky.

Or worse, full customs exit, full customs entry, penalty if mismatch, in certain countries.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#94

Post by anticensor »

altairprime wrote: post #35
kortilla wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t answer the question though. If someone didn’t deplane and fulfilled the itinerary, it would cost the airline even more in fuel. Their argument is complete nonsense that they could have sold the seat for more because it’s just as valid if you actually took the flight. It’s like them taking action against you because you booked in advance and they decided they could have charged you more. WTF?

If you’d booked (H) then you would have paid more; they’re upset that you cost them the unrealized profit of P(H-X) - P(H), and also upset at the lost opportunity of selling a double-booked ticket to another passenger into your empty seat for an additional P(whatever), without having to refund you for your unused flight leg. Two profit opportunities lost for one service rendered is, to a corporation, roughly equivale…

> consumers can expect the prices of individual legs to add up to the price of a multi-leg trip — whether on plane, train, or bus — and which would fully neutralize both their complaints and the exploit.

Doesn't have to be strictly equal to sum of individual legs, even a triangle inequality relationship (multi-leg combined ticket should cost no more than the sum of individual legs) would be okay.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#95

Post by xethos »

pabs3 wrote: post #67
xethos wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half right: > "They ordered New York-based Skiplagged to pay *$4.7 million in disgorgement from the travel site’s revenues* and another $4.7 million for copyright infringement." The fine is half trademark infringement, half for "costing" AA money through not letting them resell the seat themselves

The damages were for copyright not trademark infringement, they explicitly didn't give any damages for the trademark infringement.

Damnit - I should know by now not to use the two interchangeably (especially after using the correct term in the quote!). Thanks for the correction here and below

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#96

Post by Ekaros »

Glyptodon wrote: post #29
ejddhbrbrrnrn wrote: post #16

I am on the airlines side really. They set the fare from A to B. If you start have people skipping they can no longer offer the competitive fares. The solution could be fines for doing it as a general principle. They also may cause delays due to final calls, security and manifest checks etc.

Shouldn't be the opposite? If a route goes ABC, they'd have to sell AB and BC separately instead of bundled? No more "skipping" and any trip that's not direct can freely be assembled from legs on any airline?

That would save lot of money for airlines. After all if the AB and BC is properly treated as legally separate products. Then responsibility of getting to BC with AB even if the AB is delayed would be fully on customer. Too bad we were late, now pay the full fare for BC again. As you failed to show up.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#97

Post by smashah »

Dalewyn wrote: post #83
smashah wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skipping a queue in traffic is an asshole thing to do, but we in a society give them the benefit of the doubt because we don't know what they're going through. It inconveniences literally everyone, yet it would be weird for the driver to be blocked from that road for doing so. We shouldn't accept arbitrary restrictions from stupid megacorps. I studied Aviation engineering with Pilot studies and am also a frequent fly…

>legitimate reasons to skiplag? i.e they cannot afford the full fare, Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it. >they cannot make the following flight for other reasons? Sure, but that's not skiplagging. >Being on a megacorps side against consumers is strange behaviour. I am siding with common decency. If you lie in the course of business just to save some pretty penn…

> Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it.

They did buy the ticket. Legally.

> Sure, but that's not skiplagging.

That literally is the same as skiplagging. Skiplagging is only determined on intentions, not actions as it is the same action.

> If skiplagging becomes more common, airlines will ultimately raise prices for everyone to make up for the inefficiency and everyone loses. Screw that noise.

You should be more mad about people flying for cheap with credit card points, that literally DOES raise prices for everyone. But I'm sure you do that all the time so it magically makes it okay.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#98

Post by Dalewyn »

smashah wrote: post #97
Dalewyn wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>legitimate reasons to skiplag? i.e they cannot afford the full fare, Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it. >they cannot make the following flight for other reasons? Sure, but that's not skiplagging. >Being on a megacorps side against consumers is strange behaviour. I am siding with common decency. If you lie in the course of business just to save some pretty penn…

> Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it. They did buy the ticket. Legally. > Sure, but that's not skiplagging. That literally is the same as skiplagging. Skiplagging is only determined on intentions, not actions as it is the same action. > If skiplagging becomes more common, airlines will ultimately raise prices for everyone to make up for the inefficiency and ever…

>They did buy the ticket. Legally.

Yes, that ticket is a binding contract for both sides.

If you sign a contract fully aware you don't intend to honor it, you are an asshole.

>Skiplagging is only determined on intentions,

...Yes?

I'm not sure if you're being daft. It is skiplagging to buy something with the intent to not honor the deal, it is not skiplagging if you cannot honor the deal due to factors outside your control.

>You should be more mad about people flying for cheap with credit card points, that literally DOES raise prices for everyone.

The airlines receive compensation from the banks so it's a non-issue.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#99

Post by Dalewyn »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #92
Dalewyn wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>customers react to them rationally There is nothing rational about maliciously misleading someone in a business transaction. >If the airlines allowed customers to notify them that they won't be taking the final flight without any extra costs, You absolutely can: Just walk up to the nearest ticketing counter on your way out the airport and let them know you won't be flying. Simple, done. You might still get blacklist…

> There is nothing rational about maliciously misleading someone in a business transaction. Honestly at this point I think you're just being purposefully obtuse. Of course it's rational for customers to but a ticket A -> B -> C if they want to fly A -> B and the ticket A -> B -> C is cheaper than the ticket A -> B. What's irrational is for airlines to price their tickets that way. > You absolutely can: Just walk up t…

>Of course it's rational

No, it is absolutely not.

Merchants can price their products however they want, and they have no obligation to sell to you. Customers can purchase a product if it suits them, including the price, and they have no obligation to buy from them.

The rational thing to do if buying a ticket from A to B is too expensive is to not buy it, let alone buy a ticket that flies to C.

>Being blacklisted is quite obviously a cost.

Don't break contracts you've signed if you don't want to get penalized.

>Passengers being blacklisted means that _rational_ customers doing this won't tell the airline.

Rational customers will tell the airline that their plans need changing/cancelling. This is just common decency as a human being, my dude.

>If the airline didn't want passengers to skip the final leg of their flight without telling them, they could simply allow the customer to notify them without extra costs. They choose blacklisting (or charging to to "change" your ticket to not take the final flight) and this is the result.

Sure, because airlines (and merchants overall) don't like it when customers try to change the deal on short or no notice. That said, if it's due to outside factors most airlines will try to accomodate you.

If you want to change the deal for unjustifiable personal reasons, of course you will get penalized.

>I mean I get that you work in the airline industry and hence align your arguments to those that profit the airlines,

I'm not, and I'm not sure where you drew that conclusion from. I am familiar with the aviation industry because I have family and friends who work(ed) in it (pilots, ATC, etc.) and I am a very frequent flyer myself.

>you really should accept that the airlines are knowingly creating this environment and that customers are just reacting exactly as you'd expect.

Most customers by and large are reasonable, they buy tickets that take them to their desired destination and the airline honors it. It's not a super power to be a decent human and conduct yourself professionally.

Re: Jury awards American Airline $9.4M from website behind 'skiplagging' hack

#100

Post by smashah »

Dalewyn wrote: post #98
smashah wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Air travel is a privilege, not a right. If you can't afford a ticket, don't fucking buy it. They did buy the ticket. Legally. > Sure, but that's not skiplagging. That literally is the same as skiplagging. Skiplagging is only determined on intentions, not actions as it is the same action. > If skiplagging becomes more common, airlines will ultimately raise prices for everyone to make up for the inefficiency and ever…

>They did buy the ticket. Legally. Yes, that ticket is a binding contract for both sides. If you sign a contract fully aware you don't intend to honor it, you are an asshole. >Skiplagging is only determined on intentions, ...Yes? I'm not sure if you're being daft. It is skiplagging to buy something with the intent to not honor the deal, it is not skiplagging if you cannot honor the deal due to factors outside your co…

> I'm not sure if you're being daft

Not surprised, you wouldn't be able to recognize daft if it were staring at you through the mirror.

> The airlines receive compensation from the banks so it's a non-issue.

Yeah bro the banks give out credit card points out of the kindness of their hearts, it's not like they charge merchants fees to make up for it which then get paid for by everyone in society because some cheap bozos think they're mining free amex points sitting in business class having not actually paid for it.

Post reply on HN