Re:Southwest's Bullshit Lawsuit Over a Site That Made $45
by ekanes on Sunday January 28, 2018 @08:42PM
(#16254769)
I'm torn. If it's a Good Thing that a company offers this to it's users, but another company causes Southwest to pull the concept because they make it easier to take advantage of, do we all lose together? So, yes, for a time some people gain at Southwest's expense, but long-term I'd kind of rather Southwest kept it. A tech-assisted tragedy of the commons doesn't really help anyone, long-term.
Re:Southwest's Bullshit Lawsuit Over a Site That Made $45
by rahimnathwani on Sunday January 28, 2018 @09:52PM
(#16255018)
The policy seems to me a form of price discrimination (i.e. separating a single market into two or more separate markets, based on the price elasticity of demand of the customers).
People for whom $10 or $20 isn't a big deal, will not bother to check if their flight has gone down in price, so South West gets to charge them the higher price. Others who bother to check a few times get to pay a lower price.
It seems similar to coupons/offers in the Safeway app. If you can be bothered to look and add the coupon to your account, you get a discount, but if you're rich you don't bother, and pay the higher price.
Re:Southwest's Bullshit Lawsuit Over a Site That Made $45
by Osiris on Sunday January 28, 2018 @06:33PM
(#16254267)
It really baffles me how in the U.S. the prosecution of criminal cases puts the burden of proof on the prosecution while in civil cases, the burden is on the defendant to disprove the allegations.
Re:Southwest's Bullshit Lawsuit Over a Site That Made $45
by tuna-piano on Sunday January 28, 2018 @09:35PM
(#16254940)
True from a law perspective, but think about this case.
The site had made $45. Just the threat of a lawsuit (that Southwest might not have won) was enough to shut them down. If you fight a big company like Southwest, even if you win, you probably lose (legal fees, concentration, etc).
Re:Southwest's Bullshit Lawsuit Over a Site That Made $45
by freedom7775 on Monday January 29, 2018 @08:36AM
(#16257380)
Seems like bait to me. Why would you launch a website like that when you know it is going to be attacked? If they actually wanted to provide this service they would have launched the website offshore and ignored south west.
People for whom $10 or $20 isn't a big deal, will not bother to check if their flight has gone down in price, so South West gets to charge them the higher price. Others who bother to check a few times get to pay a lower price.
It seems similar to coupons/offers in the Safeway app. If you can be bothered to look and add the coupon to your account, you get a discount, but if you're rich you don't bother, and pay the higher price.
That seems so backwards to me.
The usual description is that "the plaintiff has the burden of proving their case by a preponderance of the evidence".
The site had made $45. Just the threat of a lawsuit (that Southwest might not have won) was enough to shut them down. If you fight a big company like Southwest, even if you win, you probably lose (legal fees, concentration, etc).
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/12/eff-court-accessing-pu...
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/01/ninth-circuit-doubles-...