IMO it would serve the common person well if we changed the way the law works so that if a corporation sues you for a laundry list of things, if a single claim gets thrown out, then they all do. That prevents this insane pile-on where a half-afternoon's work by 4 people in their giant legal department turns into a multi-year nightmare for an average citizen. I think that would be a fair way to reign in the corporate "throw everything at the wall, see what sticks, or at least hope we intimidate this regular Joe into submission" approach that's all too common today.

Meh, Red Ventures' estimated $11 billion valuation is slightly more than AA's market cap.

While I agree with sentiment, I don't agree with the premise or the method. Corporations aren't the only ones stacking charges. Prosecutors and private citizens (usually operating pro se) are just as capable of frivolous litigation. The best action a judge can and should take is to dismiss the meritless claims before proceed to court phase.

Then they would just send you 12 consecutive lawsuits. If they're that big and well-funded, they've got the time.

But can't they still do that right now? So parents proposal would make the situation a tiny bit better?

Generally no. The reason you see a 12 claim filing is because they don't get unlimited do overs. You get some chances to amend the complaint, but once it starts moving forward, that's it.

Judges, courts, and basically everyone (including most defendants) would rather have one hearing than 12.

That also happens when county prosecutors are up for re-election. Stack charges in case the jury finds one claim weak, there are 5 synonyms for the same underlying crime that the jury is willing to convict on. Also helps with forcing plea bargains.

Curious how Breach of Contract can fly, considering TPG never agreed to a contract with AA to begin with. And AA is obviously not suing their own customers.

> Curious how Breach of Contract can fly, considering TPG never agreed to a contract with AA to begin with

AA presents an argument for the ToS binding TPG as a party.

There's a ToS, which is a contract.

From the AA website: "By logging in, you accept the AAdvantage terms and conditions"

Yeah, but it would seem that the points guy ISN'T logging in. The AA customers are logging in using a tool provided by TPG.

> but it would seem that the points guy ISN'T logging in. The AA customers are logging in using a tool provided by TPG.

AA provides a number of arguments against that. That's part of the dispute.

Do you think TPG has never logged into AA during the development of this tool?

Some of these are serious, like the CFAA claim, some are genuinely hilarious. Dilution? Really? Unfair competition? Are they accusing TPG of creating an airline?