The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Reclining Airline Seats

Re:The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Re... by hirundo on Tuesday August 24, 2021 @01:06AM (#28285293)

> It’s deliberately engineered by the airlines so they can sell that same space twice.

It seems more likely that they chose to leave the existing ambiguity in place than that they deliberately engineered it. They have more to lose than gain by designating explicit right-of-way, same with arm rest possession. Instead they leave it to bottom up negotiation, which works well most of the time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Re... by russellbeattie on Tuesday August 24, 2021 @01:12AM (#28285324)

Also, if everyone on the plane leans back, as most do, it's all the same amount of space, just at a 45° angle. So the airline is just selling a space with the ability to realign itself as needed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Re... by yellowapple on Tuesday August 24, 2021 @01:54AM (#28285546)

Unless you're in the very front, in which case you do gain more space without losing any from someone in front of you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Re... by eloisius on Tuesday August 24, 2021 @02:42AM (#28285791)

Those seats are usually already more expensive to reserve.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Fierce Legal Battle at the Heart of the Fight over Re... by Dylan16807 on Tuesday August 24, 2021 @06:42PM (#28295888)

> It seems more likely that they chose to leave the existing ambiguity in place than that they deliberately engineered it.

Once the same thing has been happening for a long time, and you keep designing it that way, it becomes deliberate engineering.

[ Parent | on HN ]