A Texas federal jury has awarded American Airlines a whopping $9.4 million in a lawsuit filed against Skiplagged.com, a website that helps travelers get cheaper flights by booking flights with a connection and then abandoning the connecting flight to the final destination.

The airline industry loathes Skiplagged, even though there’s technically nothing illegal about the practice it’s promoting. Last week, the court awarded $4.7 million from Skiplagged’s revenue based on an estimate of lost fares and another $4.7 million for copyright infringement, as it was scraping American’s flight schedules in violation of the airline’s terms of service.

American also sued over trademark infringement, claiming that Skiplagged was using the American logo on its website to make it appear the site was endorsed by American; the judge disagreed on that one.

As of today, Skiplagged still returns fares and routes from American Airlines. It’s unclear if that will change. We have reached out for comment.

Most airlines expressly prohibit skiplagging—effectively an exploit of the airline business model—and use technology to try and detect when customers are doing it. Travelers have reported being banned from certain airlines for years after being caught.

The concept of skiplagging—and why airlines hate it—is somewhat complicated to understand. Let’s say you want to travel from Boston to San Francisco, and a search on Google Flights returns one-way trips costing $300. You could instead book a flight from Boston to Sacramento with a layover in San Francisco for $199. In essence, what Skiplagged is doing is revealing this “hidden” itinerary that gets you to San Francisco for $100 less. All you do is book the flight to Sacramento, and when you land in San Francisco (your actual intended destination), just leave the airport and abandon the connecting flight.

It seems counterintuitive — why would flying to San Francisco and taking another flight to Sacramento be cheaper than just flying to San Francisco? Essentially, major airlines work on a model in which direct flights between every city would not make sense — how many people really want to fly from Boston to Sacramento? So in the interest of efficiency, the airlines use major cities like San Francisco as central connecting hubs for flights to other destinations with less demand. The airline is charging the passenger based on demand to Sacramento, offering a reduced fare to ensure it fills those seats to Sacramento and generates at least some revenue. Airlines also feel they can charge more for direct flights because of the convenience factor for passengers.

But skiplagging messes with the business model. In the case of skiplagging, airlines use algorithms to estimate how many passengers will miss their flight, and then intentionally overbook the flight to generate extra revenue. The airline gets revenue from the person who missed the flight, and additional revenue from someone else who in turn took that seat. When a passenger makes the first leg of a flight, they have to assume that the passenger will also make their connecting flight and cannot overbook that seat. That’s potential revenue left on the table for American Airlines.

It’s hard to feel sympathy for the airlines in this case. Anyone who travels regularly knows how gate agents constantly plead with passengers to change their flight when a plane has been overbooked and too many people show up. The airlines are playing games to maximize revenue and frustrate customers—skiplagging just turns the tables on them, returning some power back to the customer. But a judge decided that American’s terms of service against unauthorized scraping are clear, and Skiplagged decided to violate them anyway. It’s not dissimilar from the way in which AI companies have decided to ignore terms of service agreements to scrape content sites.

Fortunately, you don’t actually need to use Skiplagged to find these fares. If you’re clever enough, you can do it using any other travel booking site like Google Flights or Expedia. Just don’t do it too frequently on the same airline or you may well get caught. And keep in mind that you cannot travel with checked luggage using this method, as your luggage will be sent to the final destination. Traveling light is better anyway.

Source: American Airlines Wins $9.4 Million From ‘Skiplagged’ Site That Exploits Airlines’ Business Model

This would not have gone this way in the EU – scraping is perfectly legal there.

Europe’s top court on Tuesday upheld a 2.4 billion euro ($2.65 billion) fine imposed on Google

for abusing its dominant position by favoring its own shopping comparison service.

[….]

The fine stems from an antitrust investigation by the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, which concluded in 2017.

The commission said at the time that Google had favored its own shopping comparison service over those of its rivals.

Google appealed the decision with the General Court, the EU’s second-highest court, which also upheld the fine. Google then brought the case before the European Court of Justice, the EU’s top court.

The ECJ on Tuesday dismissed the appeal and upheld the commission’s fine.

[…]

Source: Google’s 2.4 billion euro fine upheld by Europe’s top court

Apple will be required to pay $14 billion in back taxes to Ireland after Europe’s top court released a new ruling on Tuesday, according to a report from the Financial Times. Apple CEO Tim Cook has previously called the case “total political crap” but the judgment is final and Apple will not be able to appeal.

The European Commission’s executive vice president, Margrethe Vestager, first brought the case against Apple alleging that Ireland had given the tech company a deal that “constituted illegal State aid,” by waiving so much in taxes. Apple is now on the hook to pay those taxes, which have been sitting in an escrow account for the past six years, according to the Financial Times. Oddly enough, the original €14.3 billion set aside has fallen in value after first being set aside in 2018 because it was invested in European government bonds.

[…]

Source: Apple Ordered to Pay $14 Billion in Back Taxes

Peloton on Thursday said it will start charging new subscribers a one-time $95 activation fee if they bought their hardware on the secondary market as more consumers snag lightly used equipment for a fraction of the typical retail price.

[…]

During its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended June 30, Peloton said it saw a “steady stream of paid connected fitness subscribers” who bought hardware on the secondary market. The company said the segment grew 16% year over year.

“We believe a meaningful share of these subscribers are incremental, and they exhibit lower net churn rates than rental subscribers,” the company said in a letter to shareholders.

“It’s also worth highlighting that this activation fee will be a source of incremental revenue and gross profit for us, helping to support our investments in improving the fitness experience for our members,” interim co-CEO Christopher Bruzzo later added on a call with analysts.

[…]

Bruzzo said that those who buy a used Bike or Bike+ have access to a virtual custom fitting ahead of their first ride, as well as a history summary that shows how many rides those bikes had before they were resold.

“We’re also offering these new members discounts on accessories such as bike shoes, bike mats and spare parts,”

[…]

Source: Peloton to charge $95 activation fee for used bikes

corporate greed at its best – notice that what you get for this extra fee is basically nothing or the ability to buy more stuff.

Warners Bros. Discovery has not been having a great time recently, and is going through a wave of increasingly desperate cost-cutting initiatives because of it. Several of those movements have felt particularly targeted at the studio’s animated offerings, from its inability to release finished films to selling off its current, past, and would-be successes to other streamers. Its latest indignity comes at the cost of Cartoon Network’s online presence.

Variety reports that Warner completely wiped the Cartoon Network website—previously home to an archive of clips and full episodes of a wide variety of animated series, including the likes of Steven Universe, Teen Titans Go!, We Bare Bears, Adventure Time, and other past and present CN series—leaving nothing and redirecting visitors to a message encouraging them to instead sign up for Max.

[…]

As well as removing free access to series, the Cartoon Network website also hosted years of beloved flash games relating to its shows. While many have been erased over the years through various site redesigns—and archived elsewhere for nostalgic fans—at least some of the current archives are still accessible via international versions of the Cartoon Network website in regions where Max is currently unavailable.

The news comes after Warner recently announced plans to shutter its dedicated streaming service for classic animation, Boomerang.

[…]

Source: Warner Bros. Scrubs Cartoon Network Website, Erasing Years of History

Italian prosecutors in Milan investigated the LVMH subsidiary Dior’s use of third-party suppliers in recent months. Prosecutors said these companies exploited workers to pump out bags for a small fraction of their store price.

Citing documents examined by authorities, Reuters reported last month that Dior paid a supplier $57 to produce bags that retailed for about $2,780. The costs do not include raw materials such as leather.

The relevant unit of Dior didn’t adopt “appropriate measures to check the actual working conditions or the technical capabilities of the contracting companies,” a prosecution document said, according to Reuters.

In probes through March and April, investigators found evidence that workers were sleeping in the facility so bags could be produced around the clock, Reuters reported. They also tracked electricity-consumption data, which showed work was being carried out during nights and holidays, the report said.

The subcontractors were Chinese-owned firms, prosecutors said. They said most of the workers were from China, with two living in the country illegally and another seven working without required documentation.

The probe also said safety devices on gluing and brushing machines were removed so workers could operate them faster.

[…]

The probe also extended to Giorgio Armani contractors, and the luxury company was accused of not properly overseeing its suppliers.

Armani paid contractors $99 per bag for products that sold for more than $1,900 in stores, according to documents seen by Reuters.

[…]

Judges in Milan have ordered units of both companies to be placed under judicial administration for one year. Reuters reported earlier this year that they’d be allowed to operate during the period.

A regular manufacturing practice

The prosecution said violating labor rules was a common industry practice that luxury giants relied on for higher profits.

“It’s not something sporadic that concerns single production lots, but a generalized and consolidated manufacturing method,” court documents about the decision to place Dior under administration said, according to Reuters.

“The main problem is obviously people being mistreated: applying labor laws, so health and safety, hours, pay,” Fabio Roia, the president of the Milan Court, told Reuters earlier this year. “But there is also another huge problem: the unfair competition that pushes law-abiding firms off the market.”

[…]

Source: Dior Paid a Contractor $57 to Make a Bag That Sold for Nearly $2,800 – Business Insider

An experiment to pay people who were homeless in Denver with no limits on how they could spend the money led to twice as many people in stable housing, according to researchers who released their one-year report Tuesday.

More than 800 people were selected to participate in the Denver Basic Income Project while they were living on the streets, in shelters, on friends’ couches or in vehicles. They were separated into three groups. Group A received $1,000 per month for a year. Group B received $6,500 the first month and $500 for the next 11 months. And group C, the control group, received $50 per month.

About 45% of participants in all three groups were living in a house or apartment that they rented or owned by the study’s 10-month check-in point, according to the research. The number of nights spent in shelters among participants in the first and second groups decreased by half. And participants in those two groups reported an increase in full-time work, while the control group reported decreased full-time employment.

The project also saved tax dollars, according to the report. Researchers tallied an estimated $589,214 in savings on public services, including ambulance rides, visits to hospital emergency departments, jail stays and shelter nights.

[…]

Mark Donovan, founder and executive director of the Denver Basic Income Project, said his goal is to make the project permanent.

“We believe the first year of the program established a sense of stability for participants, and the second year and beyond is when individuals can experience an even more profound transformation,” he said in an emailed news release. “We aim to persuade policymakers to establish permanent funding streams for programs like ours.”

Of the $9.2 million spent on the program in 2023, $7.1 million went to participants. The rest went to delivery and fund-raising costs.

The average age of participants was 44, with the youngest 18 and the oldest 86. About 34% participants were white, 27% were Black, and 7% were Indigenous or Native American.

Source: What happened after homeless people in Denver got paid with no strings attached

NEW YORK, July 1 (Reuters) – Investors in GameStop (GME.N)

, opens new tab have for now withdrawn their lawsuit accusing Keith Gill, who is known as “Roaring Kitty” and helped spur the meme stock mania of 2021, of defrauding them through a “pump-and-dump” scheme for the videogame retailer.

A proposed class action accusing Gill of securities fraud was filed on Friday in the Brooklyn, New York, federal court, but voluntarily withdrawn on Monday without explanation. The lawsuit can be refiled

, opens new tab, according to the filing.

Lawyers at the Pomerantz law firm, which represents the investors, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Investors led by Martin Radev, who lives in the Las Vegas area, said Gill manipulated GameStop securities between May 13 and June 13 by quietly accumulating large quantities of stock and call options, then dumping some holdings after emerging from a three-year social media hiatus.

They said Gill’s activities caused GameStop’s share price to gyrate wildly, generating “millions of dollars” in profit for him at their expense.

“Defendant still enjoys celebrity status and commands a following of millions through his social media accounts,” the complaint said. “Accordingly, Defendant was well aware of his ability to manipulate the market for GameStop securities, as well as the benefits he could reap.”

Gill did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Monday.

On May 12, he posted a cryptic meme on the social media platform X that was widely seen as a bullish signal for GameStop, whose stock he cheerleaded in 2021.

GameStop’s share price more than tripled over the next two days, then gave back nearly all the gains by May 24.

On June 2, Gill revealed that he owned 5 million GameStop shares and 120,000 call options, and on June 13 revealed he had shed the call options but owned 9 million GameStop shares.

Investors said the truth about Gill’s investing became known on June 3 when the Wall Street Journal wrote about the timing of his options trades and said the online brokerage E*Trade (MS.N)

, opens new tab considered kicking him off its platform.

The meme stock mania was fueled in part by investors stuck at home during the pandemic, and led to a “short squeeze” that caused losses for hedge funds betting stock prices would fall.

On Monday, trading in Chewy (CHWY.N)

, opens new tab shares became volatile after Gill revealed a 6.6% stake in the pet products retailer.

Source: ‘Roaring Kitty’ lawsuit over GameStop is withdrawn for now | Reuters

So the investors starting the sueball were manipulating the stock by repeatedly shorting it, also with stocks that did not exist. Roaring Kitty showed this up a few years ago with the result that people started buying GME and raising the price. The shorters did not like this, as it cost them loads of money and they had to roll over their shorts. They are still clinging on to their shorts (at huge costs) and a bit ago Roaring Kitty broke his silence and posted a picture. That led to a spike in GME, probably at a time where the shorters needed to re-roll their shorts, which is why they are pissed.

[…] if you’re rich enough, says the US supreme court, you can now pay off state and local officials for government acts that fit your policy preferences or advance your interests. You can give them lavish gifts, send them on vacations, or simply cut them checks. You can do all of this so long as the cash, gifts or other “gratuities” are provided after the service, and not before it – and so long as a plausible deniability of the meaning and intent of these “gratuities” is maintained.

That was the ruling authored by Kavanaugh in Snyder v United States, a 6-3 opinion issued on Wednesday, in which the supreme court dealt the latest blow to federal anti-corruption law. In the case, which was divided along ideological lines, the court held that “gratuities” – that is, post-facto gifts and payments – are not technically “bribes”, and therefore not illegal. Bribes are only issued before the desired official act, you see, and their meaning is explicit; a more vague, less vulgarly transactional culture of “gratitude” for official acts, expressed in gifts and payments of great value, is supposed to be something very different. The court has thereby continued its long effort to legalize official corruption, using the flimsiest of pretexts to rob federal anti-corruption statutes of all meaning.

The case concerns James Snyder, who in 2013 was serving as the mayor of small-town Portage, Indiana. Late that year, the city of Portage awarded a contract to Great Lakes Peterbilt, a trucking company, and bought five tow trucks from them; a few weeks later, Snyder asked for and accepted a check for $13,000 from the company. Snyder was found guilty of corruption and sentenced to 21 months in federal prison. He argued that the kickback was not illegal because it came after he awarded a contract to the company that ultimately paid him off, not before.

Absurdly the US supreme court agreed, classifying such payments as mere tokens of appreciation and claiming they are not illegal when they are not the product of an explicit agreement meant to influence official acts in exchange for money.

In so doing, the court has narrowed the scope of anti-corruption law for state and local officials to apply to only those exchanges of money, goods and official favor in which an explicit quid pro quo arrangement can be proved.

[…]

The court’s narrow vision of corruption – one in which only explicit, whispered deals in shadowy, smoke-filled back rooms count as “corruption”, and all other forms of influence and exchange are something other than the genuine article – also fundamentally misunderstands how influence-peddling works. In his controlling opinion, Kavanaugh emphasizes that in order to be an illegal bribe, a gift or payment must be accompanied by “a corrupt state of mind” on behalf of the official or benefactor. But corruption, influence-peddling, and unfair and undue methods of persuasion are more subtle and complicated than this in practice.

For an example, we need look no further than the conservative justices of the supreme court itself, who have become notorious, in recent years, for accepting lavish gifts and chummy intimacy from rightwing billionaires. According to investigative reporting by ProPublica, Clarence Thomas has accepted vacations, real estate purchases, tuition for his young relatives, and seemingly innumerable private jet trips from the billionaire Harlan Crow, as well as financing for an RV from another wealthy patron, Anthony Welters. Thomas has argued that these gifts and favors are merely the “personal hospitality” of “close personal friends”.

[…]

Source: The US supreme court just basically legalized bribery | Moira Donegan | The Guardian

Boozt AB, an online Nordic department store, has banned thousands of customers for returning an excessive number of purchased items.

The retailer has blocked about 60,000 of a total 3.5 million customers, in a bid to reduce the significant costs associated with “serial returners,” the company said in a statement. “Their behavior is too expensive for both the company and the environment,” it added.

Returns are costly for retailers both in lost revenue and in the cost of trying to turn around an item to be sold again. In some instances items returned aren’t fit to be sold again, leading to waste. In the UK alone, returns are expected to increase to more than £7 billion ($8.9 billion) by 2027, according to GlobalData. The biggest driver of returns is ill-fitting clothing and footwear.

Boozt’s savings by blocking customers amounts to “many millions,” the retailer said, without specifying an exact figure.

Source: Nordic Online Store Boozt Blocks Thousands of ‘Serial Returners’ – BNN Bloomberg

Makes sense to me